Category: USA

America’s Fastest Train Debuts in NYC This August

Staff ReporterUSA, Business 0

Amtrak is set to introduce its NextGen Acela, the fastest train in America, on the Northeast Corridor, signaling a transformation in U.S. rail travel with an emphasis on speed, comfort, and sustainability.

Amtrak has announced the scheduled launch of its NextGen Acela, anticipated as the fastest train in America. This cutting-edge locomotive will begin its service on the Northeast Corridor starting Thursday, August 28, promising quicker and more efficient travel between New York City, Boston, and Washington, D.C.

The debut of this new train establishes a modern standard for American rail travel. Designed by global rail manufacturer Alstom and assembled in Hornell, New York, the NextGen Acela represents a leap forward for the U.S. train industry. Capable of reaching speeds up to 160 mph, Amtrak plans to have 28 of these new trains operating by 2027, with the first five entering service in August.

This development presents significant opportunities for travelers in New York City. Whether it’s a spontaneous weekend getaway or a business trip, passengers can look forward to new travel possibilities departing from Penn Station. The train offers an array of modern amenities, such as USB ports, high-speed Wi-Fi, and comfortable seating with ample legroom, which enhance the travel experience. The NextGen Acela also features 27% more seating capacity and expanded service schedules during weekdays and weekends, making trips to Washington, D.C. or Boston more accessible than ever.

Amtrak President Roger Harris highlighted the transformative nature of the new train, stating, “NextGen Acela is more than a new train—it’s an evolution of travel.” Indeed, it ushers in a new era of rail travel within the United States, marking a milestone with its upcoming launch.

The NextGen Acela is engineered for comfort and efficiency, boasting features sought after by today’s travelers. These include ergonomic seating, large windows for panoramic views along the East Coast, and comprehensive onboard services such as food and drink from Café Acela, as well as free 5G-enabled Wi-Fi. This first-class approach to rail travel aims to provide a superior experience for all passengers.

Booking a seat on the NextGen Acela is designed to be straightforward, with options available via the Amtrak app, website, or at station kiosks. As the official launch approaches, Amtrak plans to release further information on how to book tickets for these new trains alongside the ongoing operation of the current Acela models.

Beyond convenience, the NextGen Acela represents a commitment to sustainable transportation. Built employing the skills of workers from the Machinists Union and incorporating components from over 180 suppliers across 29 states, the project is estimated to have generated 15,000 U.S. jobs. It also offers an environmentally friendlier alternative to short-haul flights or driving, aligning with broader ecological goals.

This new addition to Amtrak’s fleet is a pivotal element of the company’s extensive modernization plan, which includes upcoming Amtrak Airo trains scheduled for other corridors, more efficient long-distance locomotives, and interior upgrades across various train cars. This comprehensive initiative is part of Amtrak’s vision for the future of rail travel, aiming to improve efficiency and passenger experience across its network.

According to Secret NYC, the introduction of the NextGen Acela marks a significant step forward in American transportation, offering a glimpse into the future of high-speed rail travel.

Farmers’ Almanac Reveals 2025 Winter Forecast for Northeast

Staff ReporterEnvironment, USA 0

The Old Farmer’s Almanac, NOAA, and AccuWeather have released their fall 2025 and winter 2025-2026 forecasts, suggesting a warmer-than-average season is on the horizon.

As summer winds down and pumpkin spice season approaches, attention turns to what the fall and winter months will bring. Weather predictions from The Old Farmer’s Almanac, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and AccuWeather indicate a trend towards warmer temperatures and variable precipitation across the United States for the upcoming fall and winter seasons.

The transition into fall is marked by the autumnal equinox, which will occur on Monday, September 22, 2025, in the Northern Hemisphere. This event, where the Earth’s equator aligns with the sun, brings equal hours of daylight and darkness. Just a few months later, on Sunday, December 21, 2025, the winter solstice will officially usher in the winter season.

The Old Farmer’s Almanac released its fall 2025 forecast on August 6, predicting warmer-than-average temperatures and below-average rainfall for the majority of the United States. Specifically for New Jersey and the Northeast, the Almanac forecasts that different regions will experience varying weather patterns. Most of New Jersey falls within the Atlantic Corridor, where warmer temperatures and less rainfall are expected in September and October. However, northern areas, such as Sussex County, are part of the Appalachian region and may see cooler and drier conditions.

Looking ahead to the winter of 2025-2026, The Old Farmer’s Almanac anticipates a possibly milder winter influenced by increased solar activity and the transition from La Niña to neutral conditions. These factors may lead to fluctuating jet streams and a potentially “wavy” polar vortex, contributing to varying temperature patterns and periodic bursts of cold air reaching southern regions.

NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center supports the notion of a warmer fall, projecting above-normal temperatures across much of the country. Their forecasts for New Jersey reveal a 40-60% chance of warmer-than-average temperatures from September to December, though precipitation levels are expected to remain typical. For the winter months, NOAA forecasts above-average temperatures for the southern and Eastern U.S., with New Jersey and the Northeast projected to have a 33-40% likelihood of experiencing above-average temperatures in December 2025 through February 2026.

AccuWeather’s fall outlook aligns with other predictions, anticipating lingering warm and humid air over many parts of the U.S. This could delay the onset of cooler, fall-like temperatures. Their forecast suggests above-average warmth in the West, with cooler transitions by late October in northern states such as the Dakotas and Minnesota. In New Jersey and the Northeast, the transition to fall will be gradual, with some severe weather potential from September through November. Wildfire risks are expected to be moderate, extending dry periods across the region.

Snow enthusiasts might look to late October for the first measurable snowfall in colder regions like the Rockies, with New York’s Catskills and higher elevations potentially seeing snow by late November, according to AccuWeather.

The amalgamation of these forecasts offers a detailed picture of what the coming months may hold, emphasizing the likelihood of warmer conditions and the interplay of varying climate influences across different regions.

According to Newsbreak,

Source: Original article

Supreme Court Rulings Boost State Power in Redistricting

Staff ReporterUSA, Editorial/Opinion 0

The Supreme Court’s 2019 decision allows state lawmakers to continue manipulating legislative maps for partisan gain, a practice exemplified by recent developments in Texas.

In June 2019, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts lack the authority to curb partisan gerrymandering, highlighting a significant shift in how legislative districts could be formed across the United States. This landmark decision permits state legislatures to draw election maps favoring their respective parties, unless individual states or Congress act to impede the practice.

The ruling was decided by a narrow 5-4 vote, characterized by the conservative justices forming the majority. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, stated that although electoral outcomes might appear “unjust,” it is not within federal courts’ jurisdiction to intervene. Both Republican and Democratic-led states have utilized technological advances to draw districts that maximize partisan advantages in response to this decision.

The situation is currently unfolding in Texas, where Republican lawmakers are planning to redraw their congressional maps soon. The objective is to consolidate their political dominance in the state, especially in anticipation of potential Democratic advances in the 2026 midterm elections. These elections will be critical, deciding control of the House of Representatives for the last two years of President Donald Trump’s term. In a bid to mitigate Republican gains, Democrats in states like California are contemplating strategic counteractions.

Richard Pildes, an election law expert at New York University School of Law, described the current climate as “a very ugly race to the bottom.” With the balance of power in the House so fragile, Texas is encouraged to “squeeze out every district they can,” Pildes noted.

Under the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures have primary control over drawing legislative maps, but Congress retains the authority to establish rules. States are mandated to devise new maps following each decennial census; however, Texas is pushing the envelope by considering a redraw for overt political benefit mid-decade, as suggested by Governor Greg Abbott and endorsed by Trump.

Despite the Supreme Court’s precedent on partisan gerrymandering, there are legal constraints in place for how states can draw districts. The principle of “one person, one vote” requires districts to have similar populations, ensuring that individual voting power remains undiluted. The Voting Rights Act, a six-decade-old law designed to safeguard minority voters, further restricts redistricting processes, although its influence has waned due to various Supreme Court decisions, including the weakening of a provision requiring federal approval for voting law changes in historically discriminatory states.

The Court recently indicated it might further diminish the Voting Rights Act’s provisions by considering whether using race to ensure compliance with the law is unconstitutional under the 14th and 15th Amendments. Such a ruling could have profound negative implications for voting rights, according to Sophia Lin Lakin of the American Civil Liberties Union, who is involved in the case concerning Louisiana’s congressional districts.

The Trump administration has previously argued that current maps drawn along racial lines, in accordance with the Voting Rights Act, are unconstitutional. Meanwhile, civil rights groups continue to challenge Texas’s maps in court, alleging violations of the Voting Rights Act.

Amid this trend of partisan redistricting, some states have moved to depoliticize the process by establishing independent commissions to handle map drawing instead of leaving it to lawmakers. Currently, there are 18 such commissions, with only eight functioning independently. The Supreme Court narrowly upheld the use of these commissions in a 2015 decision, but the Court’s transformed composition since then casts doubt on whether the same conclusion would be reached today.

Faced with Texas’s aggressive redistricting plans, California Democrats have debated bypassing their own redistricting commission, raising questions about the future utility of independent commissions. Pildes reflected on this strategic shift, suggesting it “dramatically undermines the incentives to create commissions.”

In the earlier dispute over partisan gerrymandering, liberal Justice Elena Kagan forewarned of the potential dangers posed to democratic governance by the Supreme Court’s refusal to address biased maps in North Carolina and Maryland. “The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government,” she wrote, emphasizing that one of the Court’s roles is to defend the integrity of “free and fair elections.”

US Visa Bond Program Restricts Airports for Travelers

Staff ReporterUSA, Immigration 0

Beginning in 2025, the U.S. will implement a visa bond program requiring certain international travelers to enter and exit through designated airports, potentially posting bonds up to $15,000, alongside a new visa fee.

By August 20, 2025, the United States will launch a new visa bond program targeting nationals from countries with high rates of visa overstays. Applicants for a B-1/B-2 tourist or business visa may be required to post a refundable bond that ranges between $5,000 and $15,000. In addition to this financial requirement, they will be allowed to enter and exit the country only via an exclusive list of U.S. airports.

The aim of these restrictions is to more closely monitor compliance with visa terms. The U.S. Department of State asserts that the new requirements will facilitate the tracking and potential apprehension of travelers who may overstay their visas. However, civil rights and travel advocacy groups argue that the policy may lead to profiling and discourage legitimate travel for tourism, study, and business purposes.

This latest move is expected to complicate logistics for airlines, as they will now be tasked with verifying eligibility for both visa and airport restrictions.

In a parallel initiative, the U.S. is preparing to introduce a $250 Visa Integrity Fee, applicable to all nonimmigrant visa categories, including those for tourists, students, temporary workers, and exchange visitors. This fee will be mandatory in addition to both the visa bond, where applicable, and existing standard application fees.

The Visa Integrity Fee is scheduled to take effect on October 1, 2025, adding yet another financial burden to prospective travelers.

Both the bond program and integrity fee mark significant shifts in U.S. visa policy. For travelers from affected countries, the expense and logistical challenges of visiting the U.S. may serve as a substantial deterrent. The requirement to use specific airports adds a further layer of scrutiny and inconvenience. Although billed as temporary pilot programs, critics note that the infrastructure being established indicates these measures might extend beyond the current administration.

According to Live and Let’s Fly, these developments suggest a long-term strategy to reshape U.S. visa management.

OpenAI Provides ChatGPT to Federal Agencies for $1 Yearly

Staff ReporterTechnology, Cover, USA 0

OpenAI will offer its ChatGPT service to federal agencies for $1 a year in a new partnership with the General Services Administration (GSA).

OpenAI announced on Tuesday that it will provide its artificial intelligence (AI) model, ChatGPT, to federal agencies for a nominal fee of $1 per year. This initiative is part of a new partnership with the General Services Administration (GSA).

The announcement followed the GSA’s decision to add OpenAI’s AI model to its government purchasing system. This update also includes options for Google’s Gemini and Anthropic’s Claude, expanding the AI tools available to federal agencies.

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, emphasized the importance of making AI accessible to public servants. “One of the best ways to make sure AI works for everyone is to put it in the hands of the people serving the country,” he stated in a press release.

Altman further noted, “We’re proud to partner with the General Services Administration, delivering on President Trump’s AI Action Plan, to make ChatGPT available across the federal government, helping public servants deliver for the American people.”

This initiative offers participating federal agencies access to ChatGPT Enterprise at the symbolic price of $1 for the coming year. Additionally, these agencies will receive 60 days of unlimited access to more advanced ChatGPT features. OpenAI highlighted its commitment to security, reassuring users that data inputs and outputs would not be used to train its models.

Similarly, Anthropic is reportedly planning to provide its models to government agencies for just $1, according to Axios. Such efforts align with a broader governmental push to integrate advanced AI models more comprehensively, spurred by President Trump’s recent AI framework.

The AI framework announced last month calls for an accelerated adoption of AI technology by the government. Part of this plan includes the establishment of an AI procurement toolbox to be managed by the GSA. This toolbox will enable government agencies to select from a variety of AI models while remaining compliant with privacy, data governance, and transparency laws.

Netanyahu May Propose Reoccupation of Gaza: Israeli Media Report

Staff ReporterNation, Politics, USA 0

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly planning to propose the full reoccupation of the Gaza Strip to his security cabinet, potentially igniting widespread controversy and fear both domestically and internationally.

Israeli media reports suggest Netanyahu aims for a comprehensive takeover of the Gaza Strip to decisively defeat Hamas. A senior official in Israel is quoted as saying, “The die has been cast. We’re going for the full conquest of the Gaza Strip – and defeating Hamas.”

However, this plan has met resistance from within Israel’s military ranks. Some reports indicate that the army chief and other military leaders are not in favor of the proposal. A senior official responded to this opposition, stating that if the army chief does not support the plan, he should consider resignation.

The families of hostages held in Gaza express concern that such an operation could imperil their loved ones. Currently, 20 of the 50 individuals believed to be in Gaza are thought to be alive. Polls reveal that three-fourths of Israelis are in favor of a ceasefire deal to secure the hostages’ return.

Internationally, the proposal has sparked apprehension among Israel’s allies, who advocate for an end to the conflict and measures to address the escalating humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Hundreds of former Israeli security officials have urged U.S. President Donald Trump to press Netanyahu to cease hostilities.

Ami Ayalon, a signatory and former chief of the domestic intelligence agency, told the BBC that additional military actions would be ineffective. “From the military point of view, [Hamas] is totally destroyed. On the other hand, as an ideology, it is gaining power among the Palestinian people, within the Arab street around us, and also in the world of Islam. So the only way to defeat Hamas’s ideology is to present a better future.”

These developments come after indirect ceasefire talks with Hamas fell through. Palestinian armed groups released alarming videos of two Israeli hostages, Rom Blaslavski and Evyatar David. Both individuals appeared weak and emaciated, with David seen digging what he claimed to be his grave in an underground tunnel.

Speculation persists that the recent media announcements might be a strategy to pressure Hamas into a new agreement. The Israeli military asserts operational control over 75% of Gaza, but the proposed plan would encompass the full territory, affecting over two million Palestinian residents.

The implications of such an occupation for civilians, United Nations operations, and aid groups remain unclear. Approximately 90% of Gaza’s 2.1 million residents have been displaced, many living in overcrowded and dire conditions. Humanitarian organizations accuse Israel of hindering the distribution of essential aid, noting that many in Gaza are starving.

To improve conditions, Israel announced plans to allow local Gaza businesses to resume the import of certain goods, including baby food, fruits, vegetables, and hygiene products, which were previously halted over concerns that Hamas was benefiting from these supplies.

The need to avoid risking hostages’ lives had previously been a factor in the Israeli military’s decision to refrain from fully occupying some areas of Gaza. In a similar situation last year, six Israeli hostages were executed following ground force interventions.

The Palestinian Authority, which administers parts of the occupied West Bank, has formally condemned Israel’s proposed measures, urging the international community to intervene to prevent further military occupations.

Palestinians argue that there are far-right Israeli ministers openly advocating for a complete occupation and annexation of Gaza with intentions to establish new Jewish settlements, recalling Israel’s 2005 withdrawal of forces and dismantling of settlements in the region.

This reoccupation strategy emerges amidst increasing international efforts to revitalize the two-state solution. This long-standing proposal envisions an independent Palestinian state coexisting alongside Israel, encompassing the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem as the capital.

Recently, the UK, Canada, and France expressed conditional support for the recognition of a Palestinian state. Netanyahu is now anticipated to convene discussions with key ministers and military leaders to finalize strategies for Gaza. Initial plans reportedly involve surrounding central refugee camps and executing airstrikes and ground raids.

While Netanyahu has vowed to meet all his war objectives, Israeli media commentators question the feasibility of such promises. Writing for the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, commentator Nahum Barnea stated, “Netanyahu has never taken a gamble on this scale before,” highlighting the complexity of achieving complete control over the Gaza Strip.

Israel’s military actions in Gaza were initiated in response to Hamas’s attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, resulting in the deaths of approximately 1,200 individuals and the capture of 251 hostages. According to the Hamas-run health ministry, Israeli forces have killed at least 61,020 Palestinians in Gaza since that time, underscoring the conflict’s deadly toll.

As the situation progresses, it remains to be seen how these proposed actions will affect peace efforts in the region.

Source: Original article

Green Card Update Announced for Married Couples by Immigration Officials

Staff ReporterImmigration, USA 0

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released updated policy guidance affecting the evaluation of family-based immigrant visa petitions as part of its efforts to enhance the integrity of the process.

The new policy guidance from USCIS, effective as of August 1, targets how family-based immigrant visa petitions—commonly utilized by married couples seeking green cards—are assessed. The updated procedures aim to address fraudulent or non-meritorious petitions that could undermine confidence in lawful pathways to permanent resident status in the United States.

The policy now stands as a crucial development given the backdrop of a reported 11.3 million pending applications that USCIS is currently handling. As part of these efforts, USCIS emphasized that the acceptance of such a petition does not automatically confer legal immigration status on the beneficiary. USCIS may issue a Notice to Appear in removal proceedings should a beneficiary be identified as otherwise removable under U.S. immigration laws.

This update seeks to bring clarity to existing protocols and empower the agency in evaluating the authenticity of marriage-based and other family-related immigration petitions. These pathways serve spouses and immediate relatives pursuing lawful permanent residency. The guidance provides detailed criteria on eligibility, necessary documentation, interview processes, and the handling of multiple or interconnected petitions. It also specifies the conditions under which these petitions may be referred to other government entities.

A significant portion of the updated document elucidates the process for forwarding approved petitions to the Department of State’s National Visa Center. This is particularly pertinent if a beneficiary originally aimed to adjust their status within the U.S. but was subsequently deemed ineligible.

The policy further elaborates on scenarios where U.S. citizens, particularly those involved in military service or overseas government assignments, might file Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, directly with the Department of State. This filing is available under specific scenarios, especially in reaction to extensive disruptive events.

USCIS, in its press release, articulated that enhancing its capacity to verify eligible marriages and family connections is pivotal in maintaining compliance with the law. A principal focus of the updated policy is on fortifying alien screening processes to safeguard national security by identifying individuals with malicious intent for removal.

Morgan Bailey, a partner at Mayer Brown and a former senior official at the Department of Homeland Security, previously remarked to Newsweek on the perception of USCIS by the Trump administration. They emphasized that the administration viewed the primary role of USCIS as a screening and vetting body rather than one that distributes immigration benefits.

The updated policy is already in effect, as USCIS continues to navigate the complexities of its backlog while prioritizing immigration integrity and security.

Majority of Americans Concerned About Rising Grocery Costs

Staff ReporterUSA, Economy 0

Nearly 90% of Americans are worried about grocery prices, with more than half citing them as a major source of stress, according to a recent survey.

In a new poll conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 53% of Americans find grocery prices to be a major source of stress, while another 33% consider it a minor stressor. The survey revealed that grocery prices are the top financial concern among respondents, surpassing worries about salaries, housing costs, savings, credit card debt, and health care expenses.

The Consumer Price Index indicates that food prices have risen by 3% over the past year, with groceries specifically increasing by 2.4% and dining out becoming 3.8% costlier. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, every category of groceries, including meats, poultry, fish, and eggs, saw a price rise of 5.6% from June 2024 to June 2025. Egg prices alone surged by 27.3%, while nonalcoholic beverages increased by 4.4%, and fruits and vegetables rose by 0.7%. Cereals, bakery products, and dairy products each saw a 0.9% price hike.

Overall, food costs are climbing faster than the general inflation rate, currently standing at 2.7% as per the Consumer Price Index. Next to grocery prices, housing costs were identified as a significant source of stress for 47% of respondents, followed by concerns about savings and salary, each at 43%, and health care costs at 42%.

Price increases are not isolated to groceries alone. Data from NBC News highlights that the cost of chicken breast rose by 81 cents per pound from July 2024 to July 2025. Ground beef and eggs saw price increases of 67 cents per pound and 64 cents per dozen, respectively.

Despite President Donald Trump’s earlier promises to reduce price hikes, current food inflation rates of 3% remain below the double-digit increases seen earlier in the decade. For instance, food inflation was recorded at 10.4% in 2022 and 6.3% in 2021. Although the 2025 rate is slightly above the increases noted in 2023 (2.7%) and 2024 (2.5%), it remains largely consistent with previous trends.

Tariffs are likely to further affect grocery prices. The Budget Lab at Yale projects that tariff-related price hikes could boost food costs by another 3%. Initially, fresh produce prices may increase by nearly 7% before stabilizing at a level 3.6% higher than current prices. Long-term price hikes of 10.2% are expected for processed rice.

Other grocery items such as beverages, cereal and grains, sugar, meat, and dairy products could also see price increases due to tariffs. Products imported from countries, including bananas, beer, wine, and cheese, will face additional tariffs. In 2024, the U.S. imported food products worth approximately $221 billion, with 62% sourced from Mexico, Canada, the European Union, Brazil, and China, as reported by the Tax Foundation.

Currently, the U.S. has suspended higher tariffs on Mexico for 90 days and established a 15% tariff on imports from the EU. Canada faces a tariff rate of 35% on items not covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), up from a previous 25%. Additionally, President Trump has threatened a 50% tariff on Brazilian goods amid the ongoing legal proceedings involving his ally and the nation’s former president, Jair Bolsonaro. The average tariff on Chinese exports remains at 55%.

These developments, according to experts, are expected to exert increased pressure on already stressed American consumers.

Trump Policies Clash with India’s Strategic Interests: Report

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, USA 0

U.S. President Donald Trump’s policies in South Asia have sparked strategic tensions with India, potentially hindering bilateral relations, according to a recent report.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s strategy towards South Asia has introduced notable contradictions that have strained relations with India, as highlighted in a report cited on Saturday. While the United States continues to stress the importance of India’s role in the Indo-Pacific and seeks collaboration, several policy decisions under the Trump administration have reportedly been in conflict with India’s strategic interests.

Imran Khurshid, Associate Research Fellow at the International Centre for Peace Studies (ICPS) in New Delhi, details these issues in an article for the Eurasian Times. Among the primary concerns is the White House’s recent invitation to Pakistan’s army chief, General Asim Munir. Additionally, the U.S. has shown support for an International Monetary Fund bailout to Pakistan amid Operation Sindoor and has repeatedly praised Pakistan’s leadership. According to Khurshid, these moves have emboldened Pakistan and given it more freedom to oppose India diplomatically and militarily, especially during sensitive regional developments.

Khurshid argues that if the U.S. wants India to be a serious and independent partner in the Indo-Pacific, it must discontinue actions undermining India in South Asia and respect India’s concerns. He suggests adopting a more integrated strategy that strengthens India’s position rather than relying on fragmented regional frameworks.

The report warns that continuing contradictions in U.S. policy could damage not only bilateral ties with India but also diminish the U.S.’s broader global standing. Khurshid emphasizes that Trump’s approach may risk isolating the U.S. and undermining its leadership role globally.

Comparatively, the approach of previous U.S. administrations is credited with building trust. Leaders like Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama practiced a de-hyphenated policy, treating India and Pakistan independently while respecting India’s red lines on issues like Kashmir and strategic autonomy.

In contrast, Trump’s administration is characterized by a transactional foreign policy rooted in trade imbalances, tariffs, and leverage which has reportedly caused unease in New Delhi. This unease was further elevated by Trump’s decision to impose a 25% tariff on Indian goods, set to take effect on August 1, 2025, and threats of secondary sanctions tied to India’s continued importation of Russian oil and defense equipment.

Khurshid contends that such actions threaten to weaken vital strategic frameworks like the National Security Strategy and the Indo-Pacific Strategy, which need consistent execution to be effective. The report concludes that these developments have not only disrupted routine diplomacy but may also undermine the long-term foundations of U.S.–India strategic cooperation.

VFS Global Opens 8 New Indian Consular Centers in U.S.

Staff ReporterCover, U.S., USA, Visa 0

The Indian Mission in the United States and VFS Global have announced the inauguration of eight new Indian Consular Application Centres (ICACs) in major U.S. cities, significantly expanding service accessibility for the 5.3 million Indian diaspora.

The Indian Mission in the United States and VFS Global, a leader in trusted technology services, have unveiled eight new Indian Consular Application Centres (ICACs) in the cities of Boston, Columbus, Dallas, Detroit, Edison, Orlando, Raleigh, and San Jose. This expansion brings the total number of ICACs in the United States to 16, enhancing service accessibility for the Indian diaspora and other applicants across the country.

A further expansion is planned with the opening of another ICAC in Los Angeles scheduled for August, which will increase the total number of centers nationwide to 17. These centers are vital, providing a range of essential services such as India Visa application, Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI), passport application, renunciation of Indian citizenship, Police clearance certificate, Global Entry Programme (GEP), and various miscellaneous/attestation services.

VFS Global remains the exclusive service provider for these important functions on behalf of the Government of India in the United States. The newly launched ICACs are part of a broader initiative to streamline the application process with several enhancements.

The enhancements include ICACs remaining open on Saturdays, offering greater flexibility for applicants. Additionally, return courier services are now part of the standard service fees. Basic amenities like photographs, photocopies, and form filling will be available at no extra cost. A broader range of consular services will also be accessible, improving overall convenience for applicants.

The Ambassador of India to the United States, Vinay Mohan Kwatra, highlighted the importance of the new centers, stating, “We are very happy to announce the opening of eight new Indian Consular Application Centres. With the opening of these centers, our presence to deliver extensive consular services will expand significantly, making them more accessible and faster for the vibrant Indian diaspora.”

The new ICACs are anticipated to benefit the Indian community within the consular jurisdiction of the Indian Consulate in cities like Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, New York, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington D.C. The centers are equipped with world-class facilities aimed at providing a customer-centric experience, thereby making the application process more convenient.

Amit Kumar Sharma, Head of North America & Caribbean for VFS Global, emphasized the importance of these centers, “We are honored by the continued trust the Government of India has placed in VFS Global. These ICACs will play a crucial role in effectively meeting the growing demand for visa and consular services to India spurred by business partnerships, tourism, and trade.”

Established in 2008, VFS Global is the first outsourced visa services partner of the Ministry of External Affairs (India), offering passport, visa, and consular services for the Indian government. Since 2020, the firm has been providing these services across the United States and manages Application Centres for the Government of India across seven countries, including Australia, Iraq, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

VFS Global stands as a global leader in trusted technology services, offering non-judgmental and administrative task management related to applications for visa, passport, and consular services for client governments worldwide. Inaugurating over 3,900 Application Centres in 165 countries, the company has processed over 499 million applications since 2001, with a focus on ethical practices and sustainability.

Headquartered in Zurich and Dubai, VFS Global is majorly owned by investment funds managed by Blackstone Inc., with stakeholders such as Swiss-based Kuoni and Hugentobler Foundation, according to Glocal Konsult.

Source: Original article

July Jobs Report Weakens, Treasury Yields Tumble, Fed Governor Resigns

Staff ReporterBusiness, Nation, USA 0

U.S. Treasury yields dropped significantly on Friday following a weaker-than-anticipated July jobs report and the announcement of new tariffs by President Donald Trump.

U.S. Treasury yields experienced a substantial decline on Friday after the release of a disappointing July nonfarm payroll report and the introduction of new tariffs by President Donald Trump. The yields saw further downward movement after Federal Reserve Governor Adriana Kugler announced her resignation, allowing Trump the opportunity to nominate a new member to the central bank committee responsible for setting interest rates.

The yield on the 2-year Treasury note fell over 25 basis points to 3.698% as traders adjusted their expectations for a potential interest rate cut by the Federal Reserve at their upcoming meeting in September. The 10-year Treasury note yield decreased by 13 basis points to 4.236%, while the 30-year bond yield pulled back by 4.8 basis points to 4.837%. In financial terms, one basis point is equivalent to 0.01%, with yields and bond prices moving inversely to each other.

“Bond prices exploded higher on the all-important jobs report, as the door to a Fed rate cut in September just got opened a crack wider,” noted Chris Rupkey, chief economist at FWDBONDS. “The labor market looks in much worse shape than we thought. Bet on it. The labor market is not rolling over, but it is badly wounded and may yet bring about a reversal in the U.S. economy’s fortunes.”

Yields initially decreased further when the nonfarm payrolls for July were reported as weaker than expected, with significant downward revisions for May and June. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, nonfarm payrolls grew by 73,000 last month. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had predicted an increase of 100,000 jobs. Additionally, the unemployment rate rose to 4.2%, as anticipated.

The employment figures for June were revised to 14,000 new jobs from the previously reported 147,000, and May’s numbers were adjusted down to 19,000 from 144,000. Following this data release, President Trump announced the firing of Erika McEntarfer, commissioner at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was responsible for gathering this employment data.

Later in the day, the Federal Reserve confirmed Kugler’s resignation without specifying a reason. Her departure paves the way for Trump to appoint a new member who may support the lower interest rates that the president has advocated. Although the Fed opted to maintain current rates during their Wednesday meeting, two Trump-appointed members of the Federal Open Market Committee dissented, expressing a preference for rate cuts.

The Federal Reserve’s benchmark funds overnight lending rate has remained steady between 4.25% and 4.50% since December.

Investors were also attentive to trade developments as Trump adjusted tariff rates ahead of his self-imposed deadline on Friday, marking the end of a pause on “reciprocal” tariffs. Trump signed an executive order late Thursday, revising tariffs from 10% to as high as 41%, set to take effect on August 7.

In a phone interview with NBC News following the announcement, Trump expressed willingness for further trade negotiations, although he asserted it was “too late” for other nations to avoid the upcoming tariffs. “It doesn’t mean that somebody doesn’t come along in four weeks and say we can make some kind of a deal,” he added.

Source: Original article

Indian Americans Concerned About New Big Beautiful Law

Staff ReporterImmigration, USA 0

President Donald Trump has signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” a sweeping piece of legislation that overhauls the U.S. tax code, expands spending on defense and border security, and introduces new industry incentives, all while contributing an estimated $3 trillion to the national deficit over the next decade.

As Americans celebrated the 249th anniversary of their nation’s founding, President Donald Trump enacted a nearly 900-page piece of legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” This comprehensive reform affects the U.S. tax system, increases funding for defense, border security, and infrastructure, and provides various industry-specific incentives and subsidies. Despite these changes, the legislation will likely add $3 trillion to the national deficit within the next ten years.

While the bill encompasses a wide array of provisions impacting all Americans, it poses particular challenges for immigrant communities, including Indian Americans. Of significant concern is the allocation of $170 billion for border security and immigration enforcement. Within this, $75 billion is designated for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), an agency that has faced criticism for its aggressive tactics concerning undocumented immigrants.

Indian nationals, who make up approximately 6% of the U.S. immigrant population, are particularly impacted. The Indian diaspora has already witnessed alarming enforcement actions, with dozens of undocumented Indian immigrants deported earlier this year. The expansion of ICE funding heightens fears that such deportations could increase in frequency.

It’s not just undocumented immigrants who are affected; the legislation has also triggered anxiety among Indian nationals legally residing in the country on H-1B visas. More than a million Indian nationals are currently caught in a significant green card backlog, attributed to a legislative cap that limits employment-based green cards from any single country to 7% of the annual total of 140,000. This translates to only 9,800 green cards annually for Indian applicants, many of whom are highly skilled workers, leading to wait times that could extend for decades.

The exact impact of the new legislation on H-1B holders remains to be seen, yet there is heightened concern. The “America First” ideology, which opposes foreign labor, combined with increasing scrutiny of visas, raises fears of stricter enforcement. Indian students with F-1 visas also experience growing vulnerability amid increased enforcement of policies against campus protests and free speech.

Beyond immigration issues, there are financial provisions in the law that affect diaspora households, notably a 1% tax on international remittances starting next year. Although initially proposed at a 5% rate, intense lobbying from the money transfer industry led to its reduction. Remittances from the U.S. to India, estimated to range between $25 billion to $29 billion annually, represent the largest total sent from any one country.

The legislation also proposes substantial reductions in critical public services, including a $1 trillion cut in Medicaid spending over the next decade, potentially leaving 10 million more Americans without health insurance coverage. Despite a perception of affluence among Indian Americans, many families, especially recent immigrants or those in lower-wage jobs, rely heavily on public health programs for essential services.

On a broader scale, the macroeconomic implications of the bill have been criticized for exacerbating the federal debt, which already stands at over $36 trillion. From visa holders facing an increasingly hostile immigration environment to families dependent on remittances and public health programs, the wide-reaching effects of the new law are deeply personal.

In its effort to emphasize “America First,” the “One Big Beautiful Bill” may inadvertently alienate many, including Indian Americans who have long pursued the American dream.

Airlines Offer Customs Bypass for Faster Travel

Staff ReporterTravel, USA, World 0

International travel is becoming simpler for some passengers as American Airlines and the TSA launch a program allowing travelers to bypass typical rescreenings.

American Airlines has initiated a groundbreaking pilot program in collaboration with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), permitting select international travelers to skip the usual rescreenings by TSA and U.S. Customs. This initiative marks a significant shift in the travel process, aiming to ease the often cumbersome airport experience for passengers.

The program, aptly named One Stop Security (OSS), is designed to streamline the travel process. It enables passengers arriving from international flights to go directly to their connecting flights without needing to reclaim and recheck their luggage. Checked luggage will be automatically transferred to the connecting flight, simplifying the travel journey considerably.

Given its potential benefits, other airlines are showing interest in similar trials. Delta Airlines is expected to start its own version of the program on Wednesday, July 30, specifically for passengers traveling from London Heathrow to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, as reported by Fox News. This move could herald a broader adoption of such initiatives across the industry.

The OSS program is touted to significantly cut connection times, which typically involve the lengthy processes of clearing U.S. Customs, reclaiming checked bags, rechecking them, and passing through TSA security once more. By leveraging advanced technologies, OSS aims to reduce connection times by more than half.

David Seymour, American Airlines’ chief operating officer, praised the program, describing it as one of the most forward-thinking advances in international travel. “One Stop Security is one of the most forward-thinking enhancements we can bring to international travel — and importantly, to our customers — as it delivers a level of convenience and time-savings that’s never been available before to customers connecting from international flights,” Seymour stated.

The convenience introduced by OSS is currently limited to flights arriving at American Airlines’ largest hub, Dallas Fort Worth International Airport (DFW), from London Heathrow Airport. Travelers flying from London and transiting through Dallas will enjoy the convenience of clearing customs right at the arrival gate.

American Airlines is set to become the first carrier to roll out this initiative at a U.S. airport. The airline holds plans to expand the service across more flights and airports, offering even more travelers a chance to experience the benefits of this streamlined process.

US Travel President and CEO Geoff Freeman expressed his support for the program, recognizing it as a necessary innovation to modernize airline travel. “One Stop Security is a smart, long-overdue step toward modernizing the travel experience, eliminating redundant screening, cutting connection times and unlocking more international air service,” he remarked.

Looking to the future, the success of this initiative could encourage widespread implementation across the aviation industry, significantly altering the travel landscape by providing faster and more efficient transit experiences.

According to Fox News, these developments underscore a significant evolution in the approach to international travel, potentially setting new standards for how travelers move through airports in the future.

Source: Original article

India Leads China’s Smartphone Exports to US, Manufacturing Up 240%

Staff ReporterBusiness, Economy, USA 0

India has surpassed China as the leading exporter of smartphones to the United States, highlighting a significant shift in manufacturing supply chains away from Beijing amid ongoing tariff uncertainties.

India’s emergence as the top exporter of smartphones to the U.S. has been substantiated by a report from research firm Canalys. Smartphones manufactured in India accounted for 44% of American imports of such devices in the second quarter of this year, a substantial rise from 13% during the same timeframe last year. The total volume of Indian-made smartphones shipped to the U.S. soared by 240% compared to a year ago, illustrating India’s growing significance in the global smartphone supply chain.

Meanwhile, Chinese smartphones made up only 25% of the U.S. import market by the end of June, down from 61% the previous year. Vietnam also surpassed China, with a 30% share of smartphone exports to the U.S. These shifts underscore a reconfiguration of global supply chains, driven by geopolitical and economic tensions.

According to Sanyam Chaurasia, a principal analyst at Canalys, the primary driver of India’s increased exports has been Apple’s accelerated strategy to expand manufacturing in the country due to heightened trade tensions between the U.S. and China. For the first time, India has exported more smartphones to the U.S. than China, marking a pivotal moment in global trade dynamics.

There are reports that Apple has been hastening its plans to produce a significant portion of the iPhones sold in the U.S. within Indian facilities, aiming to manufacture approximately 25% of all iPhones in India over the coming years. This strategic shift reflects broader efforts to mitigate risks associated with tariffs and geopolitical tensions.

Despite these moves, challenges remain. Former President Trump threatened additional tariffs on Apple products unless they were manufactured domestically, though such a shift was viewed as impractical by experts due to the potential for soaring costs. Notably, many of Apple’s key products, including iPhones and Mac laptops, have been granted temporary tariff exemptions, though these measures are subject to change.

Apple’s peers, such as Samsung Electronics and Motorola, have also begun relocating assembly operations for U.S.-bound smartphones to India, but their progress is considerably more gradual and limited compared to Apple. Canalys reports that these companies are striving to diversify their manufacturing footprints to reduce dependency on China.

The trend of shifting last-mile assembly to India is gaining traction among global manufacturers, who are allocating more capacity in India to cater to the U.S. market. Renaud Anjoran, executive vice president of Agilian Technology, a Chinese electronics manufacturer, noted that the company is renovating a facility in India with plans to move a portion of its production there. The firm anticipates launching trial production runs soon before scaling up to full-scale manufacturing despite India’s lower yield rates compared with China due to quality and logistical issues.

Despite the increase in smartphone shipments, it’s important to note that these numbers do not necessarily translate to final sales but do serve as an indicator of market demand. In the U.S., iPhone shipments fell by 11% year-over-year to 13.3 million units in the second quarter, reversing a previous quarter’s growth rate of 25.7%, according to Canalys. Globally, iPhone shipments decreased by 2% from a year ago, totaling 44.8 million units from April to June.

The challenges are reflected in Apple’s stock performance, with shares declining by 14% this year amid concerns regarding tariff exposure and increasing competition in the smartphone and artificial intelligence sectors.

While Apple has commenced assembly of iPhone 16 Pro models in India, it continues to depend heavily on China’s established manufacturing infrastructure to meet U.S. demand for high-end models. The complexity of these supply chains illustrates the delicate balance companies must maintain in an evolving global trade landscape.

Amidst these uncertainties, former President Trump imposed a 26% tariff on imports from India in April, which pales in comparison to the significantly higher tariffs levied on Chinese goods then. These duties were deferred, providing a temporary hiatus in tariff pressures pending an August 1 deadline.

Source: Original article

Farmer’s Almanac Offers 2025 Fall Weather Predictions

Staff ReporterEnvironment, USA 0

The Old Farmer’s Almanac predicts a warmer, drier fall for much of the United States in 2025, with notable regional variations expected to impact agriculture, travel, and holidays.

The anticipation of fall 2025 brings a unique forecast from The Old Farmer’s Almanac, predicting warmer-than-normal temperatures coupled with below-average rainfall for most of the United States. This forecast is poised to influence many facets of life, including agriculture, fall travel, and holiday planning.

The Old Farmer’s Almanac, a resource dating back to 1792, employs metrics from solar science, climatology, and meteorology to achieve its forecasts, claiming an accuracy rate of 80%. Let’s explore the fall predictions it has provided.

For September through November, much of the country can expect warmer temperatures with a reduction in typical rainfall levels. The western half of the U.S., in particular, is projected to experience steamy conditions throughout the autumn season.

While an arid climate might grant an extended growing season and potentially vibrant fall foliage, it also raises concerns about the risk of wildfires and reduced crop yields.

Nevertheless, not all regions will conform to this warm, dry pattern. The predictions differ significantly across several parts of the country, notably the Northeast, Appalachians, and Great Lakes areas. Here’s a closer look at the region-specific forecasts:

In the Northeast, which includes Maine, New Hampshire, and parts of Massachusetts and New York, temperatures are expected to remain cool with below-average rainfall, though sporadic warm weather may break through occasionally.

The Appalachian region, stretching from Pennsylvania to western North Carolina, will see a shift from warm early September temperatures to cooler, drier conditions, punctuated by thunderstorms later in the month.

The Lower Lakes region, comprising mainland Michigan, eastern Illinois, and parts of Indiana and Ohio, is predicted to experience cooler-than-average temperatures alongside reduced rainfall from mid-September onward.

Similar chilly and dry conditions are forecasted for the Ohio Valley, with exceptions in eastern Kentucky and southern Ohio, where slightly warmer conditions may occur in September.

In the Deep South, contrasting scenarios emerge; the northern areas can anticipate hot and dry weather while the southern portions, including parts of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, are expected to see average rainfall with warmer temperatures.

The Upper Midwest, covering the eastern Dakotas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, could encounter early snowfall as cool, dry weather prevails.

Meanwhile, the High Plains, stretching from Montana to northern Texas, is one of the few regions anticipated to experience warmer, wetter conditions throughout fall.

Other areas such as the Desert Southwest and Pacific Northwest will also experience varied conditions, with the latter expecting a surprisingly sunny, wet season, whereas the former will see its typical dry heat with cooler-than-normal temperatures.

The Pacific Southwest and Alaska too will experience notable weather patterns. Southern California is predicted to have a cooler, dry autumn, diverging from central California’s warm, dry trends, while the southern part of Alaska is expected to be warmer than usual with average precipitation.

Finally, Hawaii presents a mix, with central islands experiencing cool and dry conditions, while the outlying islands will see the rare occurrence of a cool, wet season.

These predictions from The Old Farmer’s Almanac serve as an invaluable guide as communities prepare for the upcoming fall changes, according to Good Housekeeping.

Trump Imposes 25% Tariff on Indian Imports

Staff ReporterEconomy, Cover, USA 0

President Donald Trump has announced a 25% tariff on imports from India, marking the latest development in his aggressive trade policy during his second term.

President Donald Trump declared on Wednesday that imports from India will be subjected to a new 25% tariff. This decision is the most recent action in his administration’s vigorous trade policies that have increasingly become a focal point of his presidency.

The announcement, made via Trump’s social media platform Truth Social, cited India’s existing tariffs as being “far too high” and criticized their trade restrictions as “strenuous and obnoxious.” Additionally, Trump mentioned penalties targeting India’s reliance on Russian energy and military hardware.

Trump’s declaration arrives just before a crucial trade negotiation deadline on Friday, which he asserted would remain firm without extensions. He has indicated that a plethora of other nations could also experience elevated baseline tariff levels, potentially reaching as high as 20%, which builds on the already heightened 10% tariffs introduced in April.

The potential tariff levels could approach the historic highs that Trump initially proposed on April 2, deemed “Liberation Day,” which had initially unsettled global markets and triggered stock market declines.

Having initially retreated from those threats, President Trump has gradually reinstated elevated tariff measures, reminiscent of levels seen during the 1930s when protectionist trade strategies were employed in a bid to reinvigorate the U.S. economy, albeit with counterproductive outcomes that exacerbated the Great Depression.

According to the Yale University Budget Lab, as of their recent Monday analysis, U.S. consumers face a de facto tariff rate of 18.2%, the highest since 1934. This could result in a household loss equivalent of up to $2,400 by 2025. Notably, these figures were calculated before Trump’s recent tariff announcement on India.

While the 25% tariff on Indian imports is lower than the previously suggested 26% on April 2, it marks a substantial rise from India’s customary average tariff rate of 2.4% on exports to the U.S. In recent years, India has been a critical partner for the U.S., exporting approximately $90 billion in annual goods.

India recently overtook other suppliers as the leading source of smartphones imported into the United States, aligning with Apple’s strategic move to relocate production away from China due to heightened tariffs and geopolitical tensions, as reported by Bloomberg. Apple notably exported $17 billion worth of iPhones from India last year.

Apple CEO Tim Cook noted during the company’s May 1 earnings call that, starting this quarter, the majority of iPhones sold in the U.S. would likely originate from India.

beyond smartphones, the U.S. imports a variety of products from India, including chemicals, plastics, leather goods, agricultural commodities, and metals.

In the previous year, India imposed an average tariff rate of 5.2% on U.S. goods, primarily purchasing oil, cement, stone, glass, and machinery from American markets.

President Trump’s focus on tariffs as a key trade strategy perpetuates a climate of unpredictability within the global economy. Over recent weeks, Trump has unveiled new agreements with several other countries aimed at refining trade conditions with the U.S. Despite the intentions, critics argue these deals are mired in ambiguous details and difficult promises to implement.

However, major stock indices have shown resilience and have continued to rise, partly because some companies observe that the tariffs’ impact may not be as severe as initially anticipated when Trump first introduced his sweeping country-specific tariffs in April.

Nonetheless, the recently negotiated bilateral trade agreements come with tariffs significantly higher than historical norms. These agreements stipulate 19% tariffs on goods from Indonesia and the Philippines, and 15% tariffs on imports from Japan and the European Union.

Furthermore, a new deal with Vietnam imposes tariffs of 20% on its exports, with potential increases to 40% for goods rerouted from China.

Top Trump Allies Prepare for Potential Supreme Court Vacancy

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

White House officials and conservative legal circles are preparing for a potential Supreme Court vacancy during President Donald Trump’s second term, with an eye towards nominees in the mold of Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.

In anticipation of any potential vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court, White House officials and a network of conservative lawyers are organizing to ensure President Donald Trump can promptly nominate a justice who aligns with the current conservative majority.

These discussions are at a preliminary stage and are focused on selecting a nominee similar to Justices Samuel Alito, 75, and Clarence Thomas, 77. Both justices are known for their conservative jurisprudence and expansive view on Presidential powers. Trump allies are circulating shortlists to decide who might reliably uphold conservative values during a potentially lengthy tenure on the bench.

“We are looking for people in the mold of Alito, Clarence Thomas, and the late Justice Antonin Scalia,” stated a White House official knowledgeable about the process. However, the official added that preparing for a vacancy at this stage is still “premature.”

The Republican Party maintains control of the Senate, which must confirm the President’s court nominees. This majority enabled Trump to successfully appoint three justices—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—recognized within conservative legal communities during his first term.

Trump’s advisors aim to facilitate a seamless confirmation process, steering clear of the contentious hearings that marked Kavanaugh’s appointment in 2018. Concern is also growing among conservatives over Barrett’s occasional alignment with liberal judges, prompting a desire for a firmly conservative nominee.

“There’s a lot of anger at Amy Coney Barrett from the MAGA movement,” remarked Benjamin Wittes, editor-in-chief of Lawfare and a Brookings Institution senior fellow, suggesting that Trump’s next nominee might diverge from his prior selections. Trump retains the final decision on the nominee, with key roles played by Attorney General Pam Bondi, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, White House Counsel David Warrington, and Deputy White House Counsel for nominations, Steve Kenny.

Mike Davis, a conservative lawyer and prominent Trump advocate, is poised to play a significant role in the vetting process. “Justice Thomas and Justice Alito are irreplaceable and I hope they do not retire anytime soon,” Davis told TIME. He confirmed that he has submitted a shortlist of “bold and fearless” nominees and plans to “play an outside supporting role” alongside the White House team.

Potential nominees currently being considered include Andrew Oldham, a Texas-based 5th Circuit Judge, and Neomi Rao from the District of Columbia Circuit Court. Oldham, who previously worked as general counsel for Texas Governor Greg Abbott, clerked for Justice Alito, while Rao, who clerked for Justice Thomas, would make history as the first Asian-American Supreme Court Justice and only the seventh woman to hold such a position.

Other names in the conversation include Aileen Cannon, James Ho, Raymond M. Kethledge, and Amul R. Thapar, all respected legal minds within conservative circles. Additionally, John Malcolm, from the Heritage Foundation, advocates for the inclusion of Senator Mike Lee of Utah, highlighting his textualist and originalist credentials despite his non-judicial role.

Throughout his second term, Trump has strengthened the conservative bloc in the Supreme Court, using his influence to affect U.S. public policy and consolidate presidential power. His administration hopes the upcoming judicial appointments will further this agenda. Previously relying on recommendations from groups like The Federalist Society, Trump might seek nominees demonstrating personal loyalty, according to Wittes. Such a direction raises concerns about prioritizing allegiance over established jurisprudence principles.

The groundwork laid now aims to secure a future justice capable of steering judicial outcomes in line with conservative and executive branch ideals, aligning with Trump’s broader political objectives.

Top Indian Restaurants in NYC

Staff ReporterFood, USA 0

New York City teems with a plethora of Indian restaurants, offering a rich tapestry of flavors from biryanis to dosas, making the decision of where to dine a delightful challenge.

New York City boasts a diverse range of Indian restaurants, inviting both locals and tourists to explore its extensive culinary offerings. From fragrant biryanis to savory dosas, NYC’s Indian dining scene has something for everyone. Given the vast number of options, choosing a place to eat can be daunting. Thus, this guide highlights some must-visit Indian restaurants that showcase various regional specialties across the culinary landscape of India.

For a casual meal, diners can explore the bustling cafeteria located in the basement of a Hindu temple in Flushing, Queens, or visit the renowned dosa cart at Washington Square Park, operated by the legendary “dosa man,” Thiru Kumar. Here, traditional South Indian staples are a part of the daily fare, available from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., except on Sundays.

If you’re inclined towards a more upscale experience, Adda in Long Island City, East Village, managed by the accomplished team behind Semma, Dhamaka, and Masalawala & Sons, offers an indulgent menu. Diners can relish dishes such as lamb parcha and baby goat biryani, with unique experiences like a tableside “Butter Chicken Experience” tailor-made to suit individual preferences.

For those in the mood for a stop inspired by Kerala’s toddy shops, Chatti in Midtown presents a “touchings” menu reminiscent of snacky dishes often paired with toddy. This includes delights such as Malabar mutton and toddy shop beef fry, which accompany drinks like cold beer.

Lungi, on the Upper East Side, stands out as a fusion restaurant, offering dishes like masala dosas next to Sri Lankan favorites, including lamprais and string hoppers. The venue’s cozy back patio makes for an ideal setting to enjoy a dosa brunch.

Bungalow, inspired by India’s private member clubs from the turn of the 20th century, is a visually charming spot strewn with rugs and chandeliers. The restaurant’s fare—from creamy daal to roasted pineapple curry—provides a comforting yet upscale dining experience.

Over at Passerine in Flatiron, the atmosphere is akin to dining in a meadow, with lush decorations complementing a menu of beautifully plated dishes. Try starters like shrimp Koliwada or beet poriyal tart, or finish your meal with an inventive ice cream sandwich.

The Union Square restaurant from the team of Laut is known for its vibrant flavors, with a menu focused on coastal South Indian cuisine prepared by a chef from Mumbai. Dishes such as slow-cooked beef rugged with spices highlight the restaurant’s commitment to full-bodied flavors.

Hyderabadi Zaiqa in Hell’s Kitchen specializes in biryanis, offering more than a dozen varieties, including a standout goat dum biryani. Its extensive menu includes delicacies from Punjabi, Indo-Chinese, and South Indian coastal cuisines—all at wallet-friendly prices below $20.

Semma, nestled in the West Village, offers specialties rare in NYC, most notably their delectable Goanese oxtail. The ambient setting and exceptional menu cement Semma as a top dining choice.

Jackson Heights’ favorite for authentic Indian cuisine offers tantalizing housemade paneer and biryanis. However, the goat dum biryani—a standout dish hidden beneath a layer of puffed bread—is a must-try during any visit.

Masalawala & Sons in Park Slope presents a Bengali-inspired menu with seafood as the star. The festive atmosphere enhances the exceptional experience where dishes such as tiger prawns served in a young coconut take center stage.

Dhamaka, located within a lively food hall, is noted for its unmatched regional offerings. Despite premium pricing, the unique dishes, like gurda kapoora—a dish of goat kidney and testicles—justify a visit.

Since the early ’90s, a cab stand in the East Village has served hearty vegetarian Indian chaat and curries. This cherished fixture beckons both temple-goers and tourists alike for dishes like samosa chaat and pakora.

Seva in Astoria remains a favorite for its flavorful prix-fixe sampler alongside popular items such as chicken tikka and lamb vindaloo. It is a popular spot for group dining, offering a menu to accommodate all taste preferences.

At Vatan in Kips Bay, diners can enjoy an endless buffet of Gujarati vegetarian delights. The prix-fixe setup presents a variety of dishes in a unique setting adorned with traditional decor, enhancing the dining experience.

Prospect Heights’ Omar’s Fine Cuisine creatively combines Indian food, pizza, and freshly made bagels all under one roof. The unusual fusion dishes offer an intriguing culinary venture for adventurous diners.

Pongal offers a vegetarian paradise along Lexington Avenue. Accommodating vegan and Jain diets, it features a lunch special with extensive options under $15 for value seekers.

Another gem in Park Slope, this restaurant is helmed by a chef from Mangalore. With dishes ranging from dosas to ribeye steak au poivre, the beautifully executed menu offers something for everyone in a sophisticated but relaxed setting.

Raja Sweets & Fast Food in Jackson Heights, operating without a formal menu, allows diners to select delectable samosas and pakoras by sight. This bustling spot is ideal for a quick bite of authentic Indian snacks.

According to The Infatuation, these curated restaurants embody the diversity and depth of Indian cuisine in New York City, ensuring that every dining experience is memorable.

US Visa Waiver Program 2025 Updates Eligible Countries List

Staff ReporterTravel, USA, Visa 0

Travel to the United States will be more accessible for citizens of numerous countries due to the expanded US Visa Waiver Program (VWP) for 2025.

The US Visa Waiver Program, established to streamline travel to the United States, permits individuals from certain nations to enter the country for up to 90 days without a visa.

The updated version of the program for 2025 extends its outreach, making it more available to travelers worldwide. Here’s a comprehensive look at the upgraded US Visa Waiver Program.

Understanding the US Visa Waiver Program (VWP)

The Visa Waiver Program allows nationals from 42 to 43 countries to travel to the U.S. for tourism, business, or transit without requiring a visa. The 2025 revision has incorporated additional countries, while implementing stricter security protocols for certain others.

This initiative is a critical component in advancing international tourism, business exchanges, and cultural linking while safeguarding both U.S. citizens and visitors.

Overview of the 2025 US Visa Waiver Program

The 2025 update is overseen by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Eligibility mandates originating from a VWP-affiliated nation, with each visit not exceeding 90 days. Participants must pay a $21 Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) fee under the restriction that prohibits employment, study, or attaining permanent residency.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility for the 2025 Visa Waiver Program requires the traveler to:

– Hold citizenship from a VWP listed country.

– Possess a valid biometric passport complying with security standards.

– Secure an approved ESTA before travel to the U.S.

– Restrict the stay to 90 days covering tourism, business, or transit.

– Have no prior visa rejections or immigration law violations since March 2011.

– Adhere to stringent U.S. border health and security screenings.

– Ensure reciprocity, where VWP countries must extend similar travel freedom to U.S. citizens.

Expanded List of Participating Countries

By 2025, citizens from 42–43 countries can visit the United States for a maximum of 90 days without a visa, under the Visa Waiver Program. Countries across Europe, the Asia-Pacific, and other regions now include countries such as Austria, Belgium, Japan, South Korea, and more recently, Romania.

Application Process for ESTA 2025

Adhering to the program requires an ESTA application, which is conducted online:

– Submit necessary personal and travel information.

– Pay the application fee of around $21.

– Await approval, which typically happens within minutes but can take up to 72 hours.

– Travelers can subsequently stay in the U.S. for up to 90 days for tourism, business, or transit, without engaging in employment or study.

– Ensure possession of ESTA confirmation and a passport for verification before boarding and upon entry into the U.S.

Enhanced Security and Policy Adjustments for 2025

The enhanced US Visa Waiver Program introduces robust security measures, necessitating travelers to follow stricter rules concerning security, health, and criminal checks. Key updates include:

– Denial of entry for individuals who have visited countries like Iran, Syria, Iraq, North Korea, or Cuba within the last month, or those holding dual nationality with these nations.

– Increased data sharing between VWP countries aimed at bolstering security and diminishing terrorism and crime threats.

– New entrant Romania has specific mandates to provide regular crime data updates and utilize advanced passport technologies.

Important Considerations for Travelers

Despite the efficiency of the ESTA process, it does not ensure entry. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers retain the ultimate authority at points of entry. Key pointers include:

– ESTA only permits boarding; entry into the U.S. is conditional based on CBP discretion.

– The waiver is solely for tourism, business, or transit. Employment or study is not allowed without a full visa.

– From October 2025, there is a $250 visa integrity fee for VWP country travelers who apply for a visa.

The US Visa Waiver Program for 2025 offers significant advantages for international travelers, as an expanded roster of qualifying countries enables simpler access to U.S. tourism, business, or transit opportunities.

This program underscores advanced security, data sharing, and modern passport technologies while encouraging global tourism and cultural engagement. To optimize the travel experience, travelers should follow the ESTA application procedures and adhere to new security protocols and associated fees.

Source: Original article

Indian F-1 Visas Drop 44% in 2025; New Regions Rise

Staff ReporterCover, Education, USA 0

Fewer Indian students are heading to the United States in 2025, even as student visa numbers rise sharply in countries like Zimbabwe, Vietnam, and Pakistan.

Between October 2024 and March 2025, the United States issued nearly 89,000 F-1 student visas worldwide, marking a 15% decline compared to the same period in the previous year. This downward trend reflects a significant reshaping of international student inflows with a broader geographical spread, yet lower overall volumes.

Despite the overall reduction in F-1 student visas, specific regions have experienced sharp increases. Notably, there has been a surge in student visa issuance in countries such as Zimbabwe, Vietnam, and Pakistan, contrasting the decrease observed among Indian students.

The data released by the U.S. Department of State highlights this shift in trends, underscoring a diversifying pool of international applicants seeking educational opportunities in the United States.

The decline in the Indian student cohort seeking U.S. education is particularly noteworthy, given the traditionally high numbers of Indian students who pursue studies in American institutions. This change indicates evolving dynamics in global educational exchanges and the U.S. as an academic destination.

According to Business Today, these developments come amid broader global trends influencing international education and mobility, including geopolitical, economic, and policy factors that affect student decisions and institutional admissions.

Source: Original article

Trump Administration Proposes Stricter Citizenship Test and H-1B Reforms

Staff ReporterImmigration, Cover, USA 0

The Trump administration is set to introduce significant immigration reforms, targeting the H-1B visa program and the U.S. citizenship test, with plans to make both processes more challenging.

The Trump administration is preparing to implement a new wave of immigration reforms aimed at changing the visa system for skilled foreign workers and revising the citizenship test. Joseph Edlow, the newly appointed Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), detailed these plans in an interview with The New York Times, describing the existing citizenship evaluation as “easy.”

“The test as it’s laid out right now, it’s not very difficult. It’s very easy to kind of memorize the answers. I don’t think we’re really comporting with the spirit of the law,” Edlow stated during the interview on Thursday.

The proposed changes arise amid a broader crackdown on immigration during Trump’s second term, which has seen tightened visa rules and reduced refugee programs, affecting both documented and undocumented immigrants. The administration intends to reintroduce a stricter version of the citizenship test first seen during Trump’s initial term in office. Under the new format, applicants must correctly answer 12 out of 20 civics questions compared to the current requirement of 6 out of 10, thereby ensuring a deeper understanding of U.S. civics and governance beyond rote memorization.

Another key proposal involves restructuring the H-1B visa program, which serves skilled foreign workers. Edlow indicated that the USCIS plans to prioritize companies offering higher wages over the current lottery-based system. This revision would address criticism that companies exploit the system by hiring cheaper foreign labor, thus undercutting American workers.

Vice President JD Vance echoed these concerns, criticizing companies that lay off domestic workers while continuing to hire foreign workers. However, Edlow maintains, “I really do think that the way H-1B needs to be used… is to, along with a lot of other parts of immigration, supplement, not supplant, U.S. economy and U.S. businesses and U.S. workers.”

Despite the administration’s push, not everyone agrees with the proposed direction. Doug Rand, a former Biden official, cautioned that favoring higher-salary positions might undermine the original purpose of the H-1B program. “Like it or not, the H-1B program is the main way that U.S. companies can hire the best and brightest international graduates of U.S. universities,” Rand remarked to The New York Times. “Congress never allowed DHS to put its thumb on the scale based on salary.”

Edlow, who was confirmed by the Senate in July 2025, is anticipated to play a pivotal role in shaping immigration policy. With extensive experience in immigration enforcement and policy, stemming from his previous tenure at USCIS and the Justice Department, Edlow emphasized that immigration should serve as a national asset. “I think it absolutely should be a net positive,” he commented. “And if we’re looking at the people that are coming over… to advance certain economic agendas and otherwise benefit the national interest, that’s absolutely what we need to be taking care of.”

Though detailed policy documents outlining these reforms have not yet been disclosed, the USCIS has signaled a broader return to the rigorous approach seen during Trump’s first term. That era witnessed tightened green card eligibility rules and alterations to the asylum system, many of which faced legal challenges.

According to The New York Times, the tangible impact of these proposed changes on businesses and immigrants remains closely watched as the policies unfold.

FBI Cautions Chrome Users Against Specific Updates Downloading

Staff ReporterTechnology, USA 0

The FBI and CISA have issued a warning regarding a surge in Interlock ransomware attacks, emphasizing the danger posed by unofficial Chrome updates and advising users to avoid such traps for device security.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have recently cautioned individuals and organizations about a rising threat from Interlock ransomware attacks. As part of the ongoing #StopRansomware initiative, this warning targets malicious tactics aimed at compromising user devices.

The prevalence of Google Chrome as a default browser on Windows PCs, despite competition from Microsoft’s Edge and emerging AI browsers, makes it a prime target for cyberattacks. Attackers exploit its widespread use, devising ways to gain unauthorized access to personal data and systems. As a result, Chrome users often encounter a series of zero-day vulnerabilities prompting urgent updates.

Unfortunately, one of the primary means by which cybercriminals enter systems is by tricking users into installing fake Chrome updates. The FBI’s latest advisory warns that these counterfeit updates are designed as remote access trojans (RATs), which execute malicious scripts that can access startup files. This method enables continuous remote access every time the device is restarted.

The advisory points out that these deceptive entry tactics are not exclusive to corporate networks. If individuals use personal computers or smartphones connected to corporate systems, they too become susceptible. By exploiting user behavior and common browsing habits, attackers can also access personal accounts and sensitive information.

Among the tactics outlined, one is ClickFix. This scheme involves fraudulent messages or popups prompting users to enter commands into Windows to fabricate issues requiring user action. These are unequivocally attacks, and any prompt to insert or execute foreign scripts should be dismissed.

However, the more prevalent threat flagged is that of fake Chrome updates. These malicious updates can also appear on Android devices, further broadening the threat landscape. When users are prompted to download updates via emails or messages, they should be wary. Official updates are automatically downloaded by Chrome itself, which then requires a browser restart—ensuring users do not need to manually search or respond to unsolicited links.

This wave of Interlock ransomware, having emerged last year, is notable for its exploitation of straightforward lures that have been increasingly observed in cyber threats. Unlike typical ransomware methods, which focus on infected files and databases, this approach underscores the importance of vigilance against seemingly innocent user interactions.

As a prudent measure, the advisory urges users to download applications and updates only from official websites or trusted app stores, circumventing the risk of malicious links. By maintaining safe downloading practices and ensuring systems are regularly updated using authorized sources, the threat posed by these deceptive tactics can be significantly mitigated.

Additionally, organizations are encouraged to educate users about these social engineering techniques to bolster their overall cybersecurity posture. Users should remain alert to signs of potential deception and verify any suspicious communications before taking action.

In light of current threats, updating Chrome through official means remains imperative. Google has recently released high-severity security updates, underscoring the need for timely installations to protect against exploits.

For those aiming to enhance their network defenses, it is crucial to remain knowledgeable about these evolving ransomware tactics. Ongoing education, combined with a consistent approach to cybersecurity best practices, will be pivotal in safeguarding digital infrastructures against such incursions.

According to Forbes, these advisories serve as a critical reminder of the rapidly changing threat landscape within the realm of cybersecurity.

Court Again Blocks Trump Birthright Citizenship Order Nationwide

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

A second court has ruled that former President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship cannot be enforced nationwide, following a Supreme Court decision that limits nationwide injunctions.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, upheld a nationwide injunction against former President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship. The court’s ruling allows four Democratic-led states to receive a nationwide injunction, arguing that a more limited injunction would not provide the necessary relief.

U.S. Circuit Judge Ronald Gould, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, wrote for the majority, emphasizing that residents of the states involved may give birth in other states, and people affected by the executive order from other states are likely to move to these states. Judge Michael Hawkins, also a Clinton appointee, joined Gould in the decision.

However, U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick Bumatay, appointed by Trump, dissented, arguing that the states lacked the legal standing to bring forth the case. Bumatay stressed the importance of adhering to jurisdictional limits and cautioned against engaging in issues that fall outside the court’s purview.

The court’s decision arrives in the wake of a recent Supreme Court ruling that restricts federal judges from issuing nationwide injunctions that extend beyond the parties involved in a case. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court maintained that while such injunctions are generally curtailed, pathways remain open for plaintiffs to secure nationwide relief under certain conditions. These include the ability of individuals to file class action lawsuits and states to obtain universal injunctions if needed for complete relief.

Since the Supreme Court ruling, plaintiffs have pursued both these avenues to challenge Trump’s order, which sought to deny citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. who does not have at least one parent with permanent legal status. Every court that has examined the legality of the order so far has deemed it unconstitutional.

This recent decision marks the second time Trump’s order has been blocked nationwide following the Supreme Court’s ruling. Previously, a federal judge in New Hampshire granted the American Civil Liberties Union’s request to certify a nationwide class of unborn children, effectively barring the administration from enforcing the order against them.

The 9th Circuit’s case was initiated by Democratic attorneys general from Washington, Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon. The majority opinion from the panel stated that only implementing the injunction regionally would continue to impose burdens on these states. According to Gould, to accommodate the executive order, these states would need to revamp their systems for verifying eligibility for Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Title IV-E services. Thus, they would face irreparable harm under a geographically limited injunction similar to not having an injunction at all.

According to The Hill, the judiciary continues to play a crucial role in determining the limits of executive orders, especially those affecting fundamental rights such as citizenship.

Justice Department Informs Trump of Name in Epstein Files

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

Attorney General Pam Bondi reportedly informed President Donald Trump that his name, along with those of other high-profile individuals, appeared in files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, intensifying scrutiny on the Trump administration following demands to release Epstein-related documents.

Attorney General Pam Bondi reportedly informed President Donald Trump in May that his name appeared multiple times in files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal. The briefing, part of the Justice Department’s re-examination of the case, is said to have included details about other “high-profile figures” mentioned in the files, although no evidence of a so-called client list was found.

Following the revelation, the White House dismissed the report as “fake news,” while a White House official later clarified to Reuters that the administration did not deny Trump’s name appeared in some files. The official further noted that Bondi had previously shared related materials with conservative influencers earlier in the year.

Trump’s relationship with Epstein dates back to the 1990s and early 2000s, as records indicate Trump’s presence on flight logs for Epstein’s private plane and his family’s entries in Epstein’s contact book. Much of this information emerged during the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former associate, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for child sex trafficking and other crimes. During Maxwell’s trial, Epstein’s pilot testified that Trump flew on Epstein’s plane multiple times, though Trump has denied those claims.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is facing criticism for withholding Epstein records, particularly after the Trump administration reversed a campaign promise to publicize Epstein-related files. The DOJ recently concluded there was no further reason to continue investigating the case, a decision that drew ire from Trump supporters eager for more information about individuals connected to Epstein.

Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche have stated that nothing in the files necessitated further investigation or prosecution, and they filed a motion to unseal underlying grand jury transcripts. “As part of our routine briefing, we made the President aware of the findings,” they added in a joint statement.

The Wall Street Journal reported that during a White House meeting, Bondi and her deputy informed Trump that his name, along with those of numerous other notable individuals, appeared in the files. Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. In 2008, he had pleaded guilty to a prostitution charge in Florida, serving 13 months in jail.

Recently, under mounting pressure, Trump instructed the DOJ to request the release of sealed grand jury transcripts related to Epstein. However, U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg denied one such request, citing a lack of exceptions for unsealing the documents. The transcripts in question originate from federal investigations conducted in 2005 and 2007, with the DOJ also seeking documents related to indictments against Epstein and Maxwell filed in Manhattan federal court.

An earlier report by the Wall Street Journal alleged that Trump once sent Epstein a birthday note in 2003, concluding with, “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.” In response, Trump has sued the journal and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, claiming the note is fabricated.

Trump and his supporters have fueled conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein, which resonate with many in his political base. This skepticism towards official explanations is unusual, as Trump typically enjoys staunch loyalty from his followers.

Epstein’s death was officially ruled a suicide by the New York City chief medical examiner, although his connections with the elite have sparked speculation about potential foul play. The DOJ reiterated this month that Epstein died by suicide. Concerns about Epstein continue to challenge Trump and the Republican Party, with U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson recently adjourning a session early to avoid debates over releasing Epstein documents.

Amid the Epstein controversy, Trump attempts to pivot to other topics, unfoundedly alleging that former President Barack Obama had worked against his 2016 campaign—claims Obama’s office has dismissed as “ridiculous.”

USA Takes Second in 66th International Mathematical Olympiad

Staff ReporterEducation, Cover, USA 0

The United States team, sponsored by the Mathematical Association of America, has secured second place in the 66th International Mathematical Olympiad, earning five gold medals and one silver in the highly competitive event held in Australia.

The United States team achieved an outstanding performance at the 66th International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO), hosted on the Sunshine Coast of Australia from July 10 to July 20, 2025. Sponsored by the Mathematical Association of America (MAA), the team earned second place overall, with an impressive score of 216 points.

The IMO is renowned as the world’s premier mathematics competition for high school students, attracting young mathematicians from every corner of the globe. In this year’s edition, 110 countries were represented by 630 students, all competing to solve six challenging mathematical problems.

Of the six talented members of the US team, five secured gold medals while one won a silver, highlighting their exceptional problem-solving skills. Notably, team members Tiger Zhang and Alexander Wang ranked in the top ten individual scorers, underscoring the level of their mathematical prowess.

Comprising the 2025 USA IMO team were: Hannah Fox, 17, from California; Karn Chutinan, 18, from Massachusetts; Andrew Lin, 18, from New Jersey; Alexander Wang, 17, also from New Jersey; Qiao (Tiger) Zhang, 17, from California; and Ruilin (Calvin) Wang, 17, from Virginia.

Hannah Fox’s participation is especially significant, marking the second consecutive year a young woman was included in the USA IMO team. Her achievement was further celebrated with the Maryam Mirzakhani medal, awarded to the top female scorer in the Americas region.

The team benefited from expert guidance under head coach John Berman and deputy coach Yang Liu. Both played crucial roles in the intense training regimen at the MAA Mathematical Olympiad Summer Program, preparing the students for the rigors of international competition.

Students aspiring to join the USA IMO team must first succeed in a series of competitions organized by the MAA American Mathematics Competitions. These events are part of a broader initiative that sees roughly 300,000 K-12 students from over 6,000 schools and learning centers participating annually.

The success of this year’s team was generously supported by Jane Street, which contributed resources to facilitate the team’s journey to the Olympiad.

Further details about the MAA American Mathematics Competitions, including information on hosting a competition or getting involved, can be found through the formal channels of the MAA.

This remarkable achievement at the 66th International Mathematical Olympiad underscores the dedication and skill of the US team, reinforcing their position as leaders on the global stage in mathematical challenges.

Tulsi Gabbard’s White House Briefing: 5 Key Takeaways

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard held a rare press briefing at the White House to discuss new allegations against Obama administration officials regarding intelligence handling of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard addressed reporters at the White House on Wednesday, shortly after the release of a batch of documents accusing the Obama administration of misleading the public about intelligence findings related to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Gabbard made an uncommon appearance in the briefing room, indicating the White House’s intent to highlight these claims further. Her presence coincided with the release of a previously classified report from the House Intelligence Committee, originally drafted in 2017 and published in 2020.

“This report demonstrates that Putin withheld leaking compromising information on Hillary Clinton before the election, intending to release it afterward to weaken an anticipated Clinton presidency,” Gabbard stated during the briefing.

The report criticized the CIA for not adhering to standard analytic procedures, asserting that the conclusion about Putin’s actions favoring then-candidate Trump was based on minimal and unclear evidence. Gabbard emphasized the report’s implications for former President Obama, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

However, critics quickly dismissed the report as inconsistent with both the intelligence community’s findings and a bipartisan 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report. These sources concluded that Russia actively worked to interfere in the 2016 election with a preference for Trump.

Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, described the released document as partisan and insignificant. “Releasing this so-called report is just another reckless act by a Director of National Intelligence intent on pleasing Donald Trump, risking classified sources, betraying allies, and politicizing entrusted intelligence,” Warner stated.

During the briefing, Gabbard repeatedly mentioned Obama, suggesting that the 44th president may have been directly involved in misleading the public regarding the intelligence findings. “We have referred and will continue to refer these documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate their criminal implications,” Gabbard commented.

She asserted, “The evidence we have found and released points directly to President Obama leading the crafting of this intelligence assessment, supported by multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence.”

The previous day, Trump accused Obama of treason, prompting a rare response from Obama’s spokesperson, Patrick Rodenbush, who called Trump’s claims “outrageous,” highlighting them as distractions.

The report does not change established conclusions that Russia attempted to influence the 2016 election without manipulating votes. These facts were reaffirmed in a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report from 2020, then chaired by Senator Marco Rubio.

When questioned about potential legal consequences for Obama, Gabbard and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt avoided direct responses, deferring to the Department of Justice. Gabbard remarked, “I’m leaving the criminal charges to the DOJ. I’m not a lawyer,” while Leavitt stressed accountability for those responsible for wrongdoing.

Questions were also raised about relations with Rubio, a key ally of Trump. Leavitt sidestepped allegations questioning Rubio’s previous stance on Russia’s election interference.

In response to whether Gabbard’s actions might be political or meant to regain favor with Trump after recent criticism, Leavitt noted, “The only people questioning the director’s sincerity are those sowing distrust among the president’s Cabinet.”

Despite Gabbard’s frequent comments about ridding the intelligence community of politicization, her briefing incited questions about whether her disclosures themselves were politically motivated.

Addressing those concerns, Gabbard stated it was “disrespectful to the American people” to imply malicious intent, reiterating the importance of transparency in releasing the documents.

Gabbard summarized one of the significant findings from the release, citing that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s primary objective was to undermine confidence in the U.S. democratic process, rather than express a preference for a particular candidate.

According to The Hill, these developments add another layer of complexity to ongoing discussions and historical assessments of Russian interference in American electoral processes.

Obama Responds to Trump’s Call for Prosecution

Staff ReporterCover, Politics, USA 0

In an unusual move, former President Barack Obama has publicly refuted allegations by Donald Trump that he attempted to orchestrate a coup following Trump’s 2016 election victory.

Barack Obama has stepped forward to confront accusations made by Donald Trump, who claimed that the former president orchestrated a coup against him after the 2016 presidential election. Obama’s office issued a rare and emphatic statement dismissing Trump’s allegations as “outrageous” and “a weak attempt at distraction.”

The statement was released after Trump alleged that Obama was guilty of treason for purportedly leading an effort to fabricate evidence of Russian interference in the election. This accusation was part of Trump’s comments during a meeting at the White House with Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the president of the Philippines and son of the country’s former autocratic leader.

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” the statement from Obama’s office read. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”

The controversy escalated following an 11-page document released by Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence. The document claimed there was a “treasonous conspiracy” among Obama-era national security officials, and recommended their prosecution.

Obama’s office responded by highlighting the conclusions of several intelligence assessments that found Russia did influence the 2016 election, but did not manipulate vote tallies. The findings, originally supported by a 2020 report from the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio, maintained that Russia’s interference aimed to damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign, not alter voting results.

The Gabbard report suggested otherwise, claiming that Obama’s administration had coerced intelligence agencies to modify their conclusions. The report conflated different issues in an attempt to undermine the intelligence community’s assessment, made public in 2017, which indicated Russian efforts to help Trump while harming Clinton.

During the White House meeting, Trump accused Obama as the leader of this supposed conspiracy, implicating other officials such as James Comey, the former FBI director, and James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence. He described the alleged actions as treasonous and accused Obama of attempting to “steal” and “obfuscate” the election.

Trump also mentioned that Gabbard had assured him that more documents would soon be available. However, critics have pointed out that the report misrepresented crucial aspects of the assessments and failed to alter the core finding that Russia intervened in the election.

A former CIA analyst, Fulton Armstrong, criticized Gabbard’s report, stating that it was crafted to reach a predetermined conclusion. Armstrong described the document as sloppy and manipulative, dismissing references to so-called “deep state officials” as amateurish and weakening the report’s credibility.

Assertions of Russian interference were further corroborated by special counsel Robert Mueller’s 2019 report and the bipartisan Senate intelligence committee’s report led by Marco Rubio the following year. Despite this, Gabbard’s document attempted to discredit these findings through misleading comparisons and conclusions.

According to The Guardian, the document used language that confused confidence levels with probability in intelligence assessments to present a one-sided narrative intended to support its claims.

Source: Original article

Motwani Jadeja Institute for American Studies Opens in New York

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, Education, USA 0

The Motwani Jadeja Institute for American Studies (MJIAS) has been inaugurated in New York City, aiming to create a transformative platform for interdisciplinary research and cultural exchange between India and the United States.

The O.P. Jindal Global University (JGU) officially launched the Motwani Jadeja Institute for American Studies (MJIAS) on July 19 in New York City. The initiative is supported by the Motwani Jadeja Foundation, led by Silicon Valley philanthropist Asha Jadeja Motwani. The new institute is intended to be a transformative platform for interdisciplinary research, public policy, innovation, and cultural exchange between India and the United States, and it honors the late Indian-American computer scientist and Stanford professor Rajeev Motwani.

JGU founding Vice Chancellor C. Raj Kumar, in his welcome address, said, “The Motwani Jadeja Institute for American Studies (MJIAS) is not merely the establishment of a new academic institute—it is a profound affirmation of our belief that universities must serve as instruments of global transformation.”

Binaya Srikanta Pradhan, Consul General of India in New York, praised the institute as “a timely and meaningful contribution to the India–U.S. strategic partnership,” highlighting that academic institutions like MJIAS embody the spirit of “knowledge diplomacy.” Asha Jadeja Motwani, who played a significant role in launching the institute, reiterated her commitment to creating ecosystems that empower changemakers. “Through MJIAS, we are not only honoring the spirit of Rajeev, who believed in democratizing innovation and knowledge, but we are also giving life to a bold vision: to create a space where the next generation of leaders of India and the USA can question, collaborate, and co-create,” she asserted.

The institute’s vision was laid out by Professor Mohan Kumar, former Ambassador of India to France and founding director-general of MJIAS. He stated that, “MJIAS will engage with geopolitics, digital governance, trade, technology, and defense – all with a view to building a vibrant strategic partnership and ‘ring fencing’ it from geopolitical vagaries.”

Senior scholars from leading U.S. universities, including Professor Jayanth Krishnan, chair of the International Board of Advisors at JGU and a member of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law, and Professor Sital Kalantry, vice chair at Seattle University School of Law, underscored the importance of interdisciplinary learning, legal and technological innovation, and academic integrity. They commended MJIAS for situating itself at the crossroads of liberal values, democratic norms, and global citizenship.

The inauguration ceremony wrapped up with a Distinguished Public Lecture given by former Supreme Court of India judge U.U. Lalit and Tamil Nadu IT Minister Palanivel Thiaga Rajan. The event underscored the institute’s unique convergence of education, law, and technology.

Additionally, the event featured the release of the JGU Sustainable Development Report 2025, authored by Professor Padmanabha Ramanujam, dean of Academic Governance. Based in India at the JGU campus, the institute has been established with the help of a $5 million endowment, marking one of the largest philanthropic contributions to JGU and among the most significant investments in American Studies in India.

Trump Administration Releases FBI Files on Martin Luther King Jr.

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

President Donald Trump’s administration has released extensive FBI files on Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, despite opposition from his family and the civil rights group he led.

In a move met with significant opposition, President Donald Trump’s administration has unveiled a comprehensive collection of FBI surveillance documents connected to the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. This release occurred despite objections from King’s family and the civil rights organization he once led until his death in 1968.

The files, which were initially sealed following a 1977 court order, consist of more than 240,000 pages. They had been held in the National Archives and Records Administration. King’s surviving family members, including his children, Martin III and Bernice, were informed of the administration’s decision and are currently reviewing the materials. However, several family members have publicly voiced their disapproval.

In a statement reported by the BBC, Martin III and Bernice King condemned any misuse of these documents that might undermine their father’s legacy. They acknowledged the captivating public interest surrounding their father’s case but emphasized the deeply personal nature of the matter. The siblings urged that the files should be considered within their full historical context.

Martin Luther King Jr., a Baptist minister and Nobel laureate, was assassinated in Memphis on April 4, 1968, at the age of 39. James Earl Ray pleaded guilty to King’s murder but later recanted his confession. King’s family has long dealt with the profound personal grief and the impact of his untimely death on their lives.

The statement from Martin III and Bernice King further detailed the continuing impact of their father’s death, describing it as an intensely personal grief and a devastating loss that affected his wife, children, and even the granddaughter he never met. They requested that those engaging with the released files do so with empathy, restraint, and respect for the family’s ongoing mourning. At the time of King’s assassination, Bernice was five years old, and Martin III was ten.

While the release of these documents satisfies a longstanding curiosity, it raises questions about privacy and historical integrity as society revisits the circumstances surrounding one of America’s most pivotal figures.

According to Indian Express, these developments have reignited discussions about Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy and the perennial quest for truth and justice regarding his tragic death.

Severe Heat Returns: Areas Facing the Most Intense Conditions

Staff ReporterEnvironment, USA 0

The United States is experiencing intense heat as a new heat dome subjects millions to soaring temperatures from the South to the Midwest, with some areas expected to feel the hottest weather of the year.

As the summer hits its peak across the United States, a new weather phenomenon known as a heat dome is locking in oppressive heat and humidity, causing temperatures to climb dramatically from the Gulf Coast to the Midwest. This weather pattern is affecting nearly 60 million people, stretching from Florida to South Dakota, as intense heat blankets the regions.

Cities across the country are bracing for extremely high temperatures with heat indexes reaching well into the triple digits. Some places are set to see what could be their hottest days of the year, notably in Chicago, St. Louis, and Memphis, Tennessee, as the mercury rises to the upper 90s and possibly higher. Memphis could experience triple-digit temperatures as early as Tuesday, contributing to the intense conditions across the South and Midwest.

This current heatwave is not expected to shatter numerous records, but its potential dangers are significant. A Level 3 of 4 heat risk is in effect from the Gulf Coast to Minnesota, with sections of the Mississippi Valley and Gulf Coast under an “extreme” Level 4 heat risk that will persist through Thursday. Such severe heat not only threatens vulnerable populations but also imposes risks for anyone lacking adequate cooling or hydration. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warns that indoor environments can become perilous during peak heat without air conditioning.

Tuesday reveals temperatures reaching the triple digits from the South up to parts of Minnesota and South Dakota. On Wednesday, areas within the Mississippi Valley, including Memphis, might see heat indexes range between 110 and 115 degrees. The heat is compounded by high overnight temperatures that offer scant relief. For example, St. Louis might wake up to temperatures near 80 degrees on Thursday morning, nearly 10 degrees above the normal July low, with Chicago experiencing similar deviations from its usual overnight temperatures.

Such nighttime warming trends are particularly concerning, as they heighten the risk of heat-related illnesses. According to experts, nighttime temperatures are rising faster than daytime highs due to climate change, reducing the window for the human body to recover from daytime heat.

On Thursday, the extreme heat will spread further, affecting the Ohio Valley and moving towards the Northeast. Cities such as Detroit, Cleveland, and Cincinnati are expected to face temperatures near 90 degrees, much warmer than typical for July. By Friday, the East Coast, including major cities like Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York City, and Boston, will be sweltering with high temperatures in the mid to upper 90s and heat indexes potentially topping 100 degrees.

Fortunately, the heat dome is expected to diminish by Saturday, bringing temperatures closer to the July norm even though they remain high. However, much of the continental U.S. is already enduring an extremely hot summer, notably in the East where many areas are tracking towards their hottest summer on record.

Unusual streaks of highly elevated overnight temperatures rather than daytime peaks have been defining this summer’s heat, according to a CNN analysis of data from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. While the Plains and much of the West have seen less extreme heat, with Seattle and Portland among the few exceptions, cooler conditions have been rare. Parts of the San Francisco Bay Area, including Oakland and Fremont, are experiencing what could be their coolest summers on record.

The Climate Prediction Center’s latest forecast suggests that the sweltering conditions could persist into August, prolonging the heat wave for many regions that are already feeling the strain and potentially adding heat to others that have been relatively spared so far.

According to CNN, people across these affected areas are urged to take precautions and stay informed as the heat persists.

Buzz Aldrin Discusses Life Beyond Moon Landing

Dr. Bhuvan LallUSA, Profile 0

Buzz Aldrin, the second man to set foot on the moon during the historic Apollo 11 mission, continues to inspire generations with his remarkable achievements both on and beyond Earth’s surface.

On July 20, 1969, at 10:56 p.m. EDT, Neil Armstrong made history by stepping onto the lunar surface, a moment that was simultaneously broadcasted to an estimated audience of 600 million people worldwide. This unprecedented venture into space captivated imaginations globally, encompassing young and old alike. In Bhopal, a listener recalled experiencing this milestone through the radio, alongside their father.

Joining Armstrong shortly after was astronaut Buzz Aldrin, who provided a compelling description of the lunar environment as “magnificent desolation.” Together, they spent two and a half hours exploring, collecting samples, and capturing photographs, marking the first time humans had set foot on another celestial body. Their adventure left behind lasting symbols, including an American flag, a memorial patch for the Apollo 1 crew, and a plaque on the lunar module, Eagle, reading, “Here men from the planet Earth first set foot upon the moon. July 1969 A.D. We came in peace for all mankind.”

Years later, Aldrin would find his way into popular culture, featuring in films such as Michael Bay’s ‘Transformers 3’, where he famously introduced himself to the character Optimus Prime, leading to a memorable interaction. Outside of the screen, Aldrin remained an advocate for space exploration.

In the summer of 2007, the city of Los Angeles hosted the cultural festival ‘India Splendor’, celebrating the 60th anniversary of India’s independence. Buzz Aldrin, in response to an invitation, graced the event. Despite being a celebrated astronaut and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Aldrin and his wife, Lois Driggs Cannon, arrived with modesty, engaging openly with attendees, including well-known personalities, and reiterating his message about the importance of exploring Mars: “Mars is there, waiting to be reached.”

The legacy of the 1969 moon landing endures, continuing to motivate individuals to aspire toward seemingly impossible goals.

Continuing his journey of adventure and inspiration, Buzz Aldrin, now an accomplished author, holds the record as the oldest person to reach the South Pole. His message is one of ambition: “Pick an amazing dream and go for it. Don’t merely make a living; make a life. Launch out farther than you’ve ever gone before. Today, you have a shot at forever.”

Buzz Aldrin’s story serves as an exceptional illustration of dedicating one’s life to pursuits that echo beyond a single lifetime, leaving an indelible mark on humanity.

Connecticut Public Schools Ranked Second-Best in US: WalletHub

Staff ReporterEducation, USA 0

Connecticut public schools have been ranked the second-best in the United States, according to a new analysis by WalletHub, which reviewed numerous metrics to compare educational quality and safety across all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The report, released Monday, evaluated 32 critical metrics such as performance, funding, safety, class size, and instructor credentials in assessing public education systems for kindergarten through 12th grade. The states with the top-ranked public schools, based on these metrics, are Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Virginia, and New Hampshire.

Connecticut earned a total score of 67.47, securing the second spot, slightly trailing Massachusetts, which scored 74.34. Connecticut ranked second for quality and sixth for safety.

The analysis highlighted several key factors contributing to Connecticut’s high ranking. Connecticut was noted for having the second-best ACT scores in the nation, and approximately 6.6% of its public schools are ranked among the top 700 nationwide, which is the sixth-highest percentage in the country. In terms of Advanced Placement (AP) exams, Connecticut holds the third-highest share of students achieving scores of 3 or higher.

Connecticut’s pupil-to-teacher ratio is among the best in the country, ranking eighth. The state’s commitment to school safety is evidenced by its status as one of only 17 states mandating regular audits of school safety protocols.

The report further indicates that Connecticut schools have the lowest prevalence of illegal drugs on school grounds, the second-lowest youth incarceration rate, and the sixth-lowest incidence of students carrying weapons on school property.

In specific academic categories, Connecticut students performed notably well. The state ranked 16th in math test scores and 5th in reading test scores. Additionally, Connecticut leads the nation with the highest median ACT score and possesses a well-developed digital learning strategy, ranking first in this category.

Connecticut also fared well in other educational measures, placing 8th regarding the percentage of licensed or certified public K–12 teachers and 11th in dropout rates. The state has the 10th lowest bullying incidence rate and ranks 14th in the percentage of high school students who reported being threatened or injured on school grounds.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, the report listed New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Alaska as the states with the lowest rankings, positioned at 51st, 50th, and 49th respectively.

These comprehensive findings from WalletHub underscore Connecticut’s strong performance in both educational quality and school safety, distinguishing it as a leader in public education nationwide.

Trump Hosted Party with Epstein as Sole Guest: New York Times

Staff ReporterPolitics, Editorial, Opinion, USA 0

Former President Donald Trump once hosted a party at Mar-a-Lago where Jeffrey Epstein was the only other guest among a group of young women, according to a recent report by the New York Times.

For nearly 15 years, Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were known to socialize together at exclusive gatherings in Manhattan and Palm Beach, Florida. Their association, however, ended before Epstein’s first arrest. The New York Times article titled “Inside the Long Friendship Between Trump and Epstein,” by Alan Feuer and Matthew Goldstein, delves into this relationship through various anecdotes and interviews.

A particularly noteworthy story from the report describes an event hosted by Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The occasion was a “calendar girl competition” party where, according to the article, Epstein was the only other guest invited alongside the young women. George Houraney, a businessman from Florida who arranged the event, is cited in the report as being taken aback by the exclusive guest list.

“I said, ‘Donald, this is supposed to be a party with V.I.P.s,” recounted Houraney, during a 2019 interview with The New York Times. “You’re telling me it’s you and Epstein?”

The report further reveals allegations that surfaced from the night of the party. Jill Harth, who was Mr. Houraney’s girlfriend and business partner at the time, accused Trump of sexual misconduct on that evening. In a lawsuit, Harth claimed that Trump forcibly took her into a bedroom, kissed her against her will, fondled her, and restrained her from leaving. She also alleged that a 22-year-old contestant later confided in her that Trump unexpectedly entered her bed that same night.

The anecdotal recount of this event and its implications come amid ongoing scrutiny of both Trump’s and Epstein’s past conduct. While allegations and lawsuits surrounding them have been part of public discussion for several years, new insights and testimonies continue to emerge, painting a fuller picture of their interactions and the controversies followed by both men.

According to The New York Times, this party at Mar-a-Lago marks just one element of the complex relationship between the former president and the late financier, adding another layer to the broader narrative of their shared history.

Ohio House Speaker Backs Vivek Ramaswamy for Governor Election

Staff ReporterUSA, Politics 0

Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman has endorsed Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, bolstering his status as the frontrunner in the 2026 Ohio governor’s race.

Ramaswamy, a biotech entrepreneur and former Republican presidential candidate, has secured a significant endorsement from Matt Huffman, the Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives. This endorsement marks a crucial moment in his campaign as Huffman is the latest in a line of high-ranking Republicans to support Ramaswamy.

Huffman, who serves Lima and Allen County, announced his endorsement after carefully considering Ramaswamy’s plans for Ohio. In a public statement, he praised Ramaswamy’s vision, stating, “I have concluded that Ramaswamy will be a governor who will make bold plans and certainly have the courage to execute on those plans.”

Reflecting on his own legislative background, Huffman stressed the pivotal role governors play in implementing long-term reforms. He referred to a pivotal moment in his career during a 2012 school choice conference by the Milton Friedman Institute. He recalled insights shared by former Indiana Superintendent of Education Tony Bennett, who stated that lasting policy change is often driven by governors—a view Huffman has seen validated during his 16-year tenure in the Ohio General Assembly.

Huffman lauded Ramaswamy’s focus on individual liberty and economic freedom, emphasizing the candidate’s resolve to challenge existing systems. This endorsement is a key component in Ramaswamy’s campaign, which has been gathering impressive momentum.

On July 1, Ramaswamy’s campaign announced a first-quarter fundraising total of $9.7 million since its launch in late February. This figure sets a record as the largest first-quarter fundraising achievement for a gubernatorial candidate in Ohio history, and notably, it excludes any personal contributions from Ramaswamy, highlighting robust grassroots backing.

Ramaswamy has also garnered endorsements from prominent Republican figures, among them President Donald Trump, U.S. Senator JD Vance, Donald Trump Jr., the Ohio Republican Party’s State Central Committee, and all Republican members of Ohio’s congressional delegation.

Since February, Ramaswamy’s campaign has hosted over 50 events across the state, including 36 fundraisers supporting the GOP. These initiatives have accumulated substantial funds to aid other Republican candidates and strengthen party infrastructure.

Ramaswamy aims to succeed Governor Mike DeWine, who is unable to seek re-election due to term limits. On the Democratic side, former Ohio Health Director Amy Acton has announced her candidacy. In contrast, Republican Attorney General Dave Yost withdrew from the race in May, shortly after the Ohio GOP officially endorsed Ramaswamy.

According to New India Abroad, the endorsement from Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman adds significant weight to Ramaswamy’s gubernatorial bid, further cementing his frontrunner status in the race.

Social Security Retirement Age Adjusts, Impacting U.S. Beneficiaries

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

The increase in Social Security’s full retirement age highlights the importance of strategic planning for those approaching retirement.

For many Americans, the notion of retirement is closely tied to reaching a specific age, traditionally 65. However, with gradual adjustments in the full retirement age (FRA) for Social Security benefits, those born in 1959 will start to see these changes manifest in 2025. At that time, their FRA will be 66 years and 10 months, reflecting the culmination of a gradual shift implemented over decades.

Understanding how these changes impact retirement plans is essential for maximizing Social Security benefits. The 1983 Social Security Amendments set forth a plan to incrementally increase the FRA from 65 to 67. As part of this implementation, individuals born in 1959 will need to wait until they are 66 years and 10 months to reach their full retirement age. Meanwhile, those born in 1960 or later will see an FRA of 67. As a result, people anticipating a retirement age of 66 years and 8 months—such as those born in 1958—will now need to delay their plans by an additional two months.

For those considering early retirement, choosing to collect benefits at age 62 leads to a considerable monthly benefit reduction—29% for the 1959 cohort, increasing to 30% for those born in 1960 or later. On the flip side, delaying benefits beyond the FRA can lead to an annual increase of up to 8%, reaching a total enhancement of 32% if benefits are postponed until age 70.

Individuals who wish to retire before reaching their FRA can adopt several strategies to bridge the gap without the need for full-time work. These include negotiating a phased retirement, where a three- or four-day workweek can aid in covering essential costs without eroding retirement savings. Maintaining a financial cushion through a high-yield savings or money-market account with 18-24 months’ worth of living expenses can also provide stability during this period.

Additional income can be generated by monetizing unused space in the home or driveway, such as through long-term room rentals, which can yield $700–$1,000 monthly, or driveway parking for urban dwellers, which can earn between $150 and $300. Alternatively, part-time positions at national retailers like Costco, Home Depot, and Trader Joe’s come with medical benefits and can offer both income and health insurance while awaiting full retirement benefits.

For early retirees, applying tax-smart strategies can prove beneficial. Withdrawing from taxable brokerage accounts first is advised to avoid penalties and to allow retirement accounts like IRAs or 401(k)s to continue accruing value. Additionally, Roth IRA contributions (excluding earnings) can be withdrawn at any age without facing taxes or penalties.

Maintaining a low Modified Adjusted Gross Income can help individuals qualify for subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, offering significant savings on health insurance premiums until age 65, when Medicare eligibility begins. Side income from activities such as online tutoring, pet sitting, or crafting can further supplement retirement income without the need for a full-time commitment.

As discussions among lawmakers continue regarding potential further increases to the FRA to ages 68 or 69, it is imperative to anticipate these possibilities with a flexible retirement plan. Building a cash reserve, securing part-time income opportunities, and employing tax-efficient withdrawal strategies will offer a buffer against potential future changes in the Social Security system.

While the change in the retirement age from 65 to 67 is nearly complete, careful planning remains crucial amidst the complexities of modern retirement. Even though the increase in the retirement age might seem minor, establishing a robust retirement plan can help ensure that retirement is a personal choice rather than a requirement defined by Social Security.

Source: Original article

Tax Bill Provides Americans With Notable Benefits to Consider

Staff ReporterBusiness, Finance/Economy, USA 0

Recent changes in the tax and spending legislation, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB), have introduced significant tax benefits that taxpayers should start planning for now, even before the tax season opens.

The latest tax guidelines offer several enticing opportunities beyond the well-known provisions like the elimination of taxes on tips and overtime and the $6,000 bonus deduction for seniors. Notable additions include deductions for charitable contributions and auto loan interest, as well as enhanced deductions and credits for families.

Brian Gray, a certified public accountant and tax partner at Gursey Schneider, notes the increase in planning opportunities for taxpayers who normally take the standard deduction, compared to past regulations such as the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). This change aims to make tax planning more accessible to everyday Americans.

Charitable Contributions for All

Under OBBB, taxpayers who take the standard deduction can benefit from a reinstated charitable contributions deduction starting in 2026. During the pandemic, the CARES Act allowed a temporary deduction for cash donations, but this provision expired. Now, individuals can deduct $1,000, or $2,000 per couple, as above-the-line charitable contributions without needing to itemize. This deduction not only reduces adjusted gross income but may also qualify taxpayers for additional deductions or tax credits.

Deducting Interest on Auto Loans

The new law also allows taxpayers to deduct interest on new personal auto loans without itemizing, marking a significant shift from previous requirements that were repealed in 1986. Starting in 2025 and through 2028, individuals can claim up to $10,000 in such deductions, provided they meet specific conditions. Brian Schultz from Plante Moran Wealth Management highlights that qualifying vehicles must be newly bought, assembled in the U.S., and intended for personal use, with certain income limitations.

Such deductions could change the decision-making process for potential car buyers, enabling them to weigh the benefits of purchasing versus leasing a vehicle.

Enhanced Benefits for Families

The OBBB also increases benefits for families who do not itemize deductions. For those with a Dependent Care Flexible Spending Account (DCFSA) through their employer, the annual contribution limit will permanently rise to $7,500, up from $5,000. Despite the increase taking effect next year, plans for this hike will begin in 2025, offers Schultz.

Previously, the highest contribution occurred briefly in 2021 during COVID circumstances, reaching $10,500, up from the long-standing $5,000, as noted by Newfront, an insurance brokerage firm.

The Child and Dependent Care Credit (CDCC) will also experience a double increment starting in 2026. For families with the lowest incomes, the credit percentage will increase to 50% from 35% of qualifying expenses, capping at $3,000 for one child and $6,000 for two or more children. The percentage gradually lessens as household income rises.

Schultz warns that new income phase-outs need attention, prompting taxpayers to be vigilant about their income levels to maximize the benefits of these new provisions.

While the tax season may seem far off, these developments underline the importance of early planning to harness the full potential of the new tax law changes, according to USA Today.

Source: Original article

Trump Sues Murdoch for $10 Billion Over Epstein Letter Story

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

President Donald Trump has filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal, claiming the publication falsely reported he sent a bawdy letter to Jeffrey Epstein.

President Donald Trump took legal action on Friday against media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, following the publication of an article in The Wall Street Journal alleging that Trump sent a provocative letter to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday. Trump, who has strongly denied penning the letter, is demanding damages amounting to no less than $10 billion in his defamation lawsuit.

The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of Florida’s federal court, names as defendants Murdoch, News Corp’s CEO Robert Thomson, The Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co., and the two reporters behind the article published on Thursday evening.

A spokesperson for Dow Jones responded with a statement to CNBC, asserting their confidence in the robustness and accuracy of their reporting and expressing an intent to vigorously contest the lawsuit.

This legal move aligns with mounting pressure on Trump to persuade the Justice Department to disclose its investigative files about Epstein, who committed suicide in August 2019 while facing federal child sex trafficking charges.

The contested article stated that the alleged letter from Trump to Epstein was among documentation reviewed by criminal investigators in the process of building cases against Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted accomplice said to have solicited the letter from Trump.

Trump took to his social media platform, Truth Social, to announce the lawsuit against everyone involved in publishing what he described as a “false, malicious, defamatory, fake news ‘article'” in what he referred to as a “useless rag” of a newspaper.

The lawsuit alleges that reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joseph Palazzolo co-authored an article incorrectly accusing Trump of creating a card featuring salacious language within a hand-drawn image of a naked woman. It further claims that the letter included offensive depictions allegedly signed by Trump, constituting significant journalistic and ethical oversights.

In the same post on Truth Social, Trump expressed anticipation at the prospect of having Rupert Murdoch testify, describing the forthcoming event as potentially “an interesting experience.”

Source: Original article

USISPF Appoints Taranjit Sandhu as Board Advisor and Institute Chair

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, USA 0

The US-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF) has appointed Taranjit Singh Sandhu, a veteran Indian diplomat, as an advisor to the board and chairman of its geopolitical institute.

The US-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF) has announced the appointment of Taranjit Singh Sandhu, a seasoned Indian diplomat, to the roles of board advisor and chairman of its geopolitical institute. Sandhu brings nearly four decades of diplomatic experience to the position, previously serving as India’s ambassador to the United States.

During his extensive career, Sandhu played a significant role in bolstering U.S.-India relations. His new role will see him guide USISPF’s strategic initiatives, particularly focusing on major geopolitical projects such as the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), the Quad (Indo-Pacific Quadrilateral Dialogue), and the I2U2 group, which includes India, Israel, the U.S., and the UAE.

In a statement about his appointment, Sandhu remarked, “I have had the opportunity to work on as well as follow the India-US story for over three decades. The relationship has evolved into a Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, underpinned by shared values and interests, matured in character, and nurtured by the vibrant people-to-people ties between the two countries.”

Under Sandhu’s leadership, U.S.-India relations achieved significant milestones, such as Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 2023 state visit to the U.S., President Joe Biden’s participation in the G20 summit in New Delhi, and President Donald Trump’s visit to India in 2020. Sandhu’s earlier tenure in Washington as Deputy Chief of Mission involved crucial diplomatic engagements, including facilitating Modi’s noteworthy 2014 Madison Square Garden address.

Mukesh Aghi, the president of USISPF, praised Sandhu’s extensive experience and diplomatic acumen, describing him as “one of the brightest minds New Delhi has sent to Washington.” Aghi expressed enthusiasm about collaborating with Sandhu in his new capacity at USISPF, stating, “Having worked closely with Ambassador Sandhu during his diplomatic days, I am eager to engage with him in this new avatar, this time with his new USISPF hat.”

Sandhu is expected to enhance USISPF’s efforts in multilateral forums, contribute to supply chain resilience, support energy security initiatives, and foster deeper people-to-people connections. His leadership within the Forum is anticipated to further solidify the strategic ties between the U.S. and India, the world’s largest democracies.

ITServe Alliance Donates $21,000To TEGNA Texas Flood Relief Fund

Ajay GhoshCommunity, USA 0

In response to the recent devastating flash floodscausing loss of lives and properties across Central Texas, IT Serve Alliance – Austin Chapter in coordination with the ITServe Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)officially presented a check for $21,000 in support of flood relief efforts to Byron Wilkinson, President and General Manager at KVUE Austin, representing the TEGNA Texas Flood Relief Fund at the Communities Foundation of Texas.

Vineeth R. Amaram, President of the ITServe Austin Chapter formally presented the check during the monthly meeting of Austin Chapter, attended by dozens of ITServe Chapter members of Austin and Dallas, community and business leaders and media atCentro Event Space, Round Rock, TX on July 15, 2025. Amaran was joined by Murali Bandlapalli, ITServe National Director of Bylaws, Abhishek Boinapally, President of Dallas Chapter, and National CSR Chairs Sri Chavva, and SwathySanapureddy in presenting the check on behalf of ITServe Alliance.

ITserve Austin

Referring to the recent tragedy that has impacted Texans, Vineeth R. Amaramsaid, “In the past two weeks, Central Texas has been devastated by historic flooding. We have seen homes destroyed, families displaced, and — most tragically — lives lost. These are not distant tragedies. These are our neighbors. Our community. And it is in times like these that our core values are tested. In just 7 days, our members mobilized and raised over $21,000 for flood relief efforts — a testament to the compassion, unity, and swift action that defines ITServe.”

“Through this campaign, we were not only able to respond quickly to help flood-affected families but also demonstrate the core values that define ITServe — compassion, leadership, and service. This donation reflects ITServe’s long-standing commitment to giving back, especially during critical times for our fellow Texans,”Amaram added.

Wilkinson expressed his appreciation to the ITServe community for the warm welcome and participation in such a meaningful evening, noting that ITServe’s leadership and generosity would directly impact families across Texas recovering from recent disasters.

“Thank you for including me in such a meaningful evening on behalf of KVUE Austin, representing the TEGNA Texas Flood Relief Fund at the Communities Foundation of Texas, I would extend our deepest gratitude for your generous donation to the TEGNA Texas Flood Relief Fund, where support will directly impact families across Texas who are recovering from recent disasters. It is inspiring to see the leadership your organization continues to show in giving back.”

Vineeth R Amaram President of the ITServe Austin Chapter

“This noble initiative, with rapid mobilization of resources, generous member contributions, and seamless coordination exemplify ITServe’s continued commitment to supporting communities during times of crisis,” ITServe’s National President, Anju Vallabhaneni said in a statement.

“With this effort, ITServe Alliance reaffirms its mission not only to advance the interests of the IT industry, but also to stand as a pillar of strength and support for the communities in which it operates,” Raghu Chittimalla, Governing Board Chair, said.

“In these challenging times, I want to thank the members of ITServe Alliance, whose mission is to support and empower local communities, has yet again at the forefront, extending our support to those affected by the recent floods,” Siva Moopanar, President-Elect of ITServe said.

“The mission of ITServe Alliance CSR is to empower local communities through various noble initiatives across the nation, playing a very critical role in helping us realize our mission of giving back to our communities and working towards the wellbeing of the larger society,” Tanuj Gundlapalli, National CSR Director, said. “The generous donations, resources and the time devoted by our leadership and member organizations, help ITServe in the success of our programs and positively impacting the lives of the lesser fortunate in our communities.”

“From the very beginning, ITServe’s mission has been to empower local communities through a wide range of initiatives,” said Dinesh Movva, National CSR Secretary. “This is yet another noble initiative showcasing that our members are passionate about the wellbeing of society just as they have been about their businesses.”

Amaram expressed his appreciation to Anju Vallabhaneni, for his leadership and continued encouragement of community-focused initiatives. He thanked Tanuj Gundlapalli and Dinesh Movvafor their hands-on guidance and quick approvals that helped accelerate the campaign. He expressed his gratitude to ITServe Dallas Chapter and its team, led by Dallas Chapter President Abhishek Boinapally, for their generous contribution towards this cause.

In his closing remarks, Amaram said, “A heartfelt thank you to all the dedicated members of the ITServe Alliance for stepping up with such urgency and compassion. It is your unwavering commitment to community service that continues to uphold the true spirit of ITServe We are blessed to be part of this noble effort that highlights the tech community’s role in disaster response and community recovery.”

Founded in 2010, ITServe’s vision has been to empower local communities by creating, retaining, and fostering employment opportunities within the United States. ITServe has an active membership of 2,400+ members, and 24 Chapters established across the United States, who are small & medium-sized companies that create local employment and fulfill the growing demand for highly skilled professionals in America. For information on ITServe and its many noble initiatives, please visit: www.itserve.org

UN Special Rapporteurs, Freedom House, USCIRF Call on US to Designate India as Country of Particular Concern

Kala B RUSA, World 0

Washington, D.C. (July 17, 2025) — Senior officials from the United Nations and United States, along with leading human rights experts, urged the US government to designate India as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) over serious and ongoing violations of human rights and religious freedoms. The call was made during a Congressional Briefing on Capitol Hill on Thursday, July 17, attended by over 100 congressional staffers.

Speakers included Professor Nicolas Levrat, UN Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues; Ed O’Donovan, Senior Adviser to the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders; Dr. Asif Mahmood, Vice Chair of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF); Freedom House President Annie Boyajian; and Ria Chakrabarty, Senior Policy Director at Hindus for Human Rights (HFHR).

unnamed (1)

Professor Levrat stated that while India portrays itself as the world’s largest democracy, it is “currently not living up to this appellation, as it fails to protect the most fundamental human rights of millions of its citizens.”

“India is falling short, very short of its legal obligations. Its current government is not only failing to protect persons belonging to minorities, but creates and actively promotes conditions that deliberately targets persons belonging to minorities, putting them at risk, not only as regards their way of life, but also as regards their very life,” said Professor Levrat.

“Not only is India failing its responsibility to protect its own citizens, especially those belonging to minorities, but the authorities are actually creating conditions for extremists groups or local authorities to maintain and even increase insecurity for Muslims and other religious minorities in India,” Professor Levrat added. “This leads not only to violation of their freedoms, but also to killings. Governments should guarantee respect for human rights for all, including persons belonging to minorities.”

unnamed (4)

Professor Levrat further noted that he and two other UN Special Rapporteurs wrote to the Indian Government in 2024, asking for measures to be taken to guarantee the safety of minorities and to avoid hate speech by government officials. In this letter, Special Rapporteurs flagged concerns about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s use of hate speech during Indian elections, as well as the reported refusal of state police and the Electoral Commission to acknowledge complaints made regarding such speeches and failing to conduct formal investigations.

“Unfortunately, and despite its commitment as a Member State of the UN, the Indian Government never answered this allegation letter,” he said.

The Special Rapporteur called on elected representatives to pressure governments, including the government of India, to guarantee respect for human rights for all.

unnamed (5)

Freedom House President Annie Boyajian expressed serious concerns about declining freedoms in India, targeting of the political opposition and spoke extensively on reasons behind downgrading India from “Free” to “Partly Free.”

“We have unfortunately seen 19 consecutive years of decline in freedom around the world, including in India. India’s score has declined in the last decade, and it has lost 15 points since 2014, and this is fairly significant due to discriminatory policies and a rise in persecution,” Boyajian said in her remarks.

“In our most recent edition, which came out in February, India’s score dropped by 3 points because of challenges to the political opposition during Parliamentary elections in the spring,” she added.

On transnational repression, she said that “India is the only democracy we have tracked that is involved in transnational repression. Since 2014, we have documented 14 incidents perpetrated by India.”

unnamed (6)

Boyajian called on the Indian government to review and restructure the anti-conversion laws, build legal and societal protections for victims of religious violence, strengthen police accountability and field-level response, protect religious spaces and ensure the prosecution of perpetrators and prevent impunity. She also called on the US Department of State to designate India as a Country of Particular Concern, [and] impose sanctions on individuals and entities.

Ed O’Donovan, Senior Adviser to UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, Mary Lawlor called the treatment of human rights defenders in India as “wanton cruelty” and said that the overall environment continues to grow more hostile by the day.

“Counter terrorism measures have been weaponized to crush dissent, limit access to resources and spread disinformation, where human rights defenders are labelled as “anti state” or “terrorists”. Those most impacted are activists from oppressed communities and religious ethnic minorities,” O’Donovan said in his remarks.

He raised concerns about the judicial harassment and arbitrary detention of activists working on a range of issues including defenders of Dalit, Adivasi and Muslim rights.

“Indian authorities have perverted the concept of due process and turned it into punishment,” he said.

He also spoke about arrests of activists, academics and lawyers in the Bhima Koregaon case, shuttering of thousands of NGOs by revoking their Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) licenses “to stifle dissent and restrict civil society space.” He also raised concerns about the crackdown on civil society in Jammu and Kashmir including arrest of activist Khurram Parvez and journalist Irfan Meraj, both of which remain languished behind bars under the draconian anti-terror law UAPA since 2021 and 2023 respectively.

According to O’Donovan, the office of UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders has sent 40 letters to the Indian government since 2020 making it the country which received the third highest numbers of allegation letters from the mandate. The Indian government has only responded to 20 percent of these letters.

He called on the International community, including the UN and the elected representatives to call out the Indian government for its violations against human rights defenders and called for congressional visit focusing on the legal framework for civil society and human rights defender and designating India as Country of Particular Concern and inducing human rights clauses to weapons sales to India.

Dr. Asif Mahmood, Vice Chair of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), who submitted pre-recorded remarks, emphasized that USCIRF has been recommending that India be designated as a CPC since 2020. The State Department has yet to make this designation.

“In USCIRF’s 2025 annual report, we recommended that the US government impose targeted sanctions on individuals and entities, including India’s Research and Analysis Wing for their culpability in transnational repression, most notably the 2023 assassination attempt of a Sikh activist in New York and the killing of another Sikh activist in Canada,” said Dr. Mahmood. “We urge members of Congress to conduct full investigations into transnational repression allegations. We will also continue to push the US government to designate India as a CPC and to take concrete policy actions, including imposing financial and visa restrictions.

“From majoritarianism to oligarchy to anti-democratic governance, Modi has used every tool in the authoritarian playbook to crush the spirit of Indian democracy,” said Ria Chakrabarty, Senior Policy Director at Hindus for Human Rights.

“And the only way to protect a democracy and the rights of the people is to retake power from aspiring autocrats and the movements that support them,” Ria added.

The briefing was cosponsored by the Indian American Muslim Council, Genocide Watch, World Against Genocide, Hindus for Human Rights, New York State Council of Churches, The Religious Nationalisms Project, American Muslim Institution, Association of Indian Muslims of America, The Humanism Project (Australia), and the Center for Pluralism.

Stablecoin bill clears House in key crypto victory

Ajay GhoshTechnology, USA 0

The House passed a bill setting up a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, sending it to President Trump’s desk and marking a major win for the industry.Lawmakers voted 308-122 on Thusday to pass the GENIUS Act following a tumultuous “crypto week” in the chamber that saw competing GOP factions bring the House floor to a standstill for two days.

A dozen Republicans voted against the measure, while 102 Democrats supported it.

The bill regulating dollar-backed digital tokens now heads to Trump’s desk, where he has indicated he is eager to sign it.

“For far too long, America’s digital assets industry has been stifled by ambiguous rules, confusing enforcement and the Biden administration’s anti-crypto crusade,” Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said at a press conference Thursday.

“But President Trump and this Congress are correcting course and unleashing America’s digital asset potential with historic, transformative legislation,” he continued.

“President Trump promised to make America the crypto capital of the world, and today, we delivered,” Emmer added.

The legislation’s future appeared in jeopardy less than 24 hours earlier.

A group of hardline Republicans tanked a procedural vote on a trio of crypto bills Tuesday, freezing the floor.

Trump struck a deal to secure their support the next day, but several holdouts remained Wednesday, as the House attempted once again to adopt a rule governing debate on the bills.

The agreement Trump reached with the hardliners also prompted new backlash from members of the House Financial Services Committee.

The deal sought to add provisions from the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act, which aims to bar the Federal Reserve from issuing a central bank digital currency (CBDC), to a broader crypto framework called the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. Both measures passed the House as well Thursday.

After hours of deliberation Wednesday — during which the rule vote remained open and the number of “no” votes from hardliners continued to grow — GOP leadership reached a deal to add the anti-CBDC provisions to the National Defense Authorization Act.

Including the provisions in the must-pass legislation would put them on track to reach Trump’s desk, assuming they don’t get stripped out of the bill as it weaves its way through Congress later this year.

The agreement convinced most of the remaining holdouts to switch their “no” votes on the rule to “yes,” allowing it to pass after more than nine hours.

It easily surpassed the previous record for longest vote in the chamber, which the House set just two weeks earlier during consideration of the GOP’s “big, beautiful bill.”

Obama Couple Responds to Recent Divorce Rumors

Staff ReporterUSA 0

Former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama have humorously dismissed persistent divorce rumors during a podcast appearance, emphasizing the strength of their decades-long marriage.

In a recent episode of the podcast “IMO,” hosted by Michelle Obama’s brother, Craig Robinson, the Obamas together addressed the speculative rumors about their marriage that have circulated over the past year.

As the episode centered around the topic of raising young men, the conversation began with lighthearted comments about the rumors. Robinson greeted Barack Obama by jokingly asking, “Wait, you guys like each other?” to which Michelle Obama humorously replied, “Oh yeah, the rumor mill.”

Playing along, Barack Obama added, “She took me back. It was touch and go for a while.” Continuing the playful banter, Robinson remarked on the couple being in the same room, prompting his sister to comment, “I know, ’cause when we aren’t, folks think we’re divorced.”

Speculation about the former first couple’s relationship began earlier this year when Barack Obama attended several public events without his wife, including the funeral for former President Jimmy Carter and the second inauguration of President Donald Trump.

In response to the gossip, Michelle Obama has clarified her absence from certain events, noting her newfound freedom to make personal choices after her daughters became adults and her husband’s departure from public office.

During an earlier episode of the same podcast series, aired on July 9, Michelle Obama expressed, “This stage in life for me is the first time that I have been completely free.”

On the recent “IMO” episode, she further assured listeners that her marriage remains strong. “There hasn’t been one moment in our marriage where I thought about quittin’ my man. And we’ve had some really hard times,” Michelle Obama shared. “We have had a lot of fun times, a lot of adventures, and I have become a better person because of the man I’m married to.”

Barack and Michelle Obama celebrated their marriage in Chicago in 1992. Their enduring partnership was highlighted this past Valentine’s Day when Barack Obama shared a heartfelt message on Instagram, posting a photo of them together. “Thirty-two years together and you still take my breath away,” he captioned the image.

Michelle Obama echoed the sentiment on her social media, sharing the same photo and stating, “If there’s one person I can always count on, it’s you, @BarackObama. You’re my rock. Always have been. Always will be.”

Such affirmations from the couple continue to counter the unfounded rumors, demonstrating the steadfast bond they maintain despite public speculation.

Source: Original article

Trump’s Disapproval Rating Reaches Record High Second Term

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

President Donald Trump’s disapproval rating has reached the highest level of his second term, according to a recent Economist/YouGov poll.

President Donald Trump’s disapproval rating has hit a new peak since the start of his second term, as reported by the latest Economist/YouGov poll conducted over the weekend. The survey indicates that 55 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s performance in office, while 41 percent express approval. This marks a slight change from the previous week, where the figures stood at 53 percent disapproval and 42 percent approval. The pattern had remained the same in the week before that.

At the beginning of his second term, Trump had an approval rating of 49 percent, while 43 percent of respondents expressed disapproval. The most recent statistic of 55 percent disapproval represents the highest disapproval rating during this term. A decline in support has been noteworthy since Trump assumed office, largely attributed to dwindling approval among Democrats and independents.

In a survey carried out late in January, Trump’s approval rating among Democrats was recorded at 12 percent. This figure has now fallen to merely 3 percent. Independents have shown a similar trend, with 41 percent approving of Trump’s job performance at the onset of his second term, a figure that has since decreased to 29 percent. The Republican base, however, shows consistent support, with an approval rating that has barely fluctuated. When Trump began his term, 94 percent of Republicans approved his handling of the presidency, compared to 92 percent in the current survey.

The Economist/YouGov survey also differentiates between self-identified MAGA Republicans and Republicans who do not align with the MAGA movement, identifying each group as making up half of the Republican survey respondents. Among MAGA Republicans, Trump’s approval rating remains exceptionally high, consistently hovering around 98 percent. By contrast, Republicans unaffiliated with the MAGA movement exhibited an initial approval rate of 90 percent at the start of Trump’s term. This figure dipped to 70 percent by mid-April but has rebounded to 85 percent in the latest poll.

This latest survey included 1,680 U.S. adults and was conducted between July 11 and 14. The poll has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points, according to The Economist/YouGov.

Trump Expresses Disappointment with Putin in BBC Interview

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, USA 0

In a recent phone interview with the BBC, President Donald Trump expressed his disappointment with Russian leader Vladimir Putin while outlining plans to send weapons to Ukraine and warning of severe tariffs if a ceasefire is not reached within 50 days.

President Donald Trump, in a recent conversation with the BBC, expressed a spectrum of views on international relations, particularly concerning Russian President Vladimir Putin and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Despite voicing disappointment with Putin, Trump insisted he remained open to diplomatic efforts, hours after unveiling plans to send arms to Ukraine and threatening Russia with significant tariffs if no ceasefire is reached in 50 days.

When asked about his trust in the Russian leader, Trump stated, “I trust almost nobody,” indicating a cautious stance. This sentiment was shared following his discussions with NATO chief Mark Rutte at the White House, during which Trump outlined frustration over missed opportunities to resolve the conflict in Ukraine, a situation he hoped to negotiate with Russia. “I’m disappointed in him, but I’m not done with him. But I’m disappointed in him,” Trump reiterated.

Pressed on potential strategies to halt the violence, Trump suggested ongoing efforts, stating, “We’re working at it, Gary,” and described a dynamic where perceived progress towards peace could be abruptly halted by aggressive actions from Russia, such as missile strikes on Kyiv.

The conflict has seen increased drone and missile assaults on Ukrainian cities, contributing to high civilian casualties since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. While Putin has advocated for peace, claiming threats from Kyiv, NATO, and Western nations must first be addressed, Trump’s administration remains aligned with NATO’s strategic objectives. Formerly critical of the alliance, Trump has since acknowledged its evolving importance as member countries commit to increasing defense spending.

Discussing NATO, Trump highlighted, “It’s now becoming the opposite of [obsolete] because the alliance was paying their own bills,” and praised the agreement to boost defense spending to 5% of economic output, a feat he described as “amazing” and previously deemed implausible.

Turning to relations with the United Kingdom, Trump spoke warmly of his personal and professional connections, attributing his fondness to successful trade deals and describing a “special bond” with the nation. He also offered candid remarks on Brexit’s aftermath, noting that while the UK had been slow to capitalize on it, progress was being made. Trump shared his intention to visit the UK again in September.

On his domestic agenda, Trump’s administration reportedly achieved declines in illegal border crossings at the US-Mexico border. The focus has now shifted to identifying, detaining, and deporting migrants in the country illegally. Trump declined to specify success metrics for deportations but emphasized the expulsion of criminals as a priority. Notably, a controversial deportation agreement involved transporting gang members to El Salvador.

In his reflection on legal challenges to administration policies, Trump underscored a series of appellate victories after initial setbacks in lower courts, describing some judges as “radical left lunatics.” His administration achieved successes, such as a Supreme Court ruling permitting migrant deportations to third countries.

Financially, Trump lauded the expansive tax reforms enacted during his tenure, including extending cuts from his first term and introducing new breaks and Medicaid cuts. He claimed, “We have the largest tax cuts in history.”

Asked about his legacy, Trump optimistically remarked, “Saving America,” and argued that the nation had been revitalized under his leadership. “I think America is now a great country, and it was a dead country one year ago,” he concluded.

Local Leaders Support Krishnamoorthi’s US Senate Bid in Illinois

Staff ReporterCommunity, USA 0

More than 40 local leaders across Illinois have endorsed Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi in his bid for the U.S. Senate.

In a show of growing support, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi has received endorsements from more than 40 local leaders throughout Illinois as he sets his sights on the U.S. Senate. This latest wave of endorsements builds on previous backing from two dozen mayors, further solidifying his campaign’s momentum.

“Local leaders know their communities better than anyone, and I am honored to have the support of this long and growing list of Illinois leaders,” Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat from Illinois, stated in a campaign press release. “From Cook County to downstate and everywhere in between, I will continue to collaborate with those who know their residents best so that together, we can build an Illinois where everyone has the opportunity to thrive.”

Notable endorsements come from Palos Township Trustee Tasneem Abuzir, Rich Township Clerk Arlene “Sugar” Al-Amin, and former Metropolitan Water Reclamation District Commissioner Frank Avila, Sr. Others include Aurora Alderwoman Shweta Baid, former Illinois Senator Michael Bond, and Will County Board Member Herb Brooks Jr.

Congressman Krishnamoorthi’s support extends across a diverse array of community leaders. For instance, Schaumburg Township Trustee Holly Fath expressed her pride in endorsing Krishnamoorthi, highlighting his model public service abilities. Similarly, Peoria County Board Member Phil Salzer commended the Congressman’s dedication to public service, insisting that Krishnamoorthi will maintain his tradition of stellar constituent services as a U.S. Senator.

Elected to Congress in 2016, Raja Krishnamoorthi is currently serving his fifth term in representing Illinois’ 8th District, which encompasses Chicago’s western and northwestern suburbs and the city’s 41st ward. He is an active participant in numerous Congressional bodies, serving as the Ranking Member of the Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. This role places him as the first South Asian American in history leading a Congressional Committee.

His legislative roles include serving on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform as Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services, Vice-Chair of the Equality Caucus, and Co-Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Immigration Task Force. Furthermore, he is the founder and Chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Caucus to End Youth Vaping and the bipartisan Solar Caucus.

Raja Krishnamoorthi’s roots trace back to Indian immigrants in Peoria, Illinois. His academic journey saw him excel as a valedictorian in high school and later graduate summa cum laude from Princeton University, majoring in mechanical engineering and earning a certificate from the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. He pursued further education at Harvard Law School, graduating with honors and clerking for a federal judge before practicing law in Chicago.

Krishnamoorthi’s campaign continues to focus on grassroots support, evidenced by his recent statement on social media platforms expressing the importance of partnering with community leaders to ensure representation for all Illinoisans in Washington, D.C.

According to News India Times, the endorsements mark a significant milestone in Krishnamoorthi’s campaign, reflecting broad grassroots and institutional support, offering potential bolstered visibility for his Senate race.

Vermont Ranked Top State for Quality of Life

Staff ReporterUSA, Lifestyle 0

Vermont has been recognized as the state with the highest quality of life by CNBC for the fifth consecutive year, highlighting its inclusive laws, low crime rate, and protections for reproductive rights.

Vermont has once again been named the best state for quality of life by CNBC, maintaining its position for the fifth year running. The announcement, made on Monday, placed Vermont at the top of a list that also includes Maine, New Jersey, Minnesota, Connecticut, Hawaii, North Dakota, Massachusetts, Nebraska, and Virginia among the top ten states with high living standards.

The Green Mountain state received an impressive A+ rating, earning a score of 228 out of a possible 265 points for its living standards. Researchers pointed to Vermont’s strong performance in several key areas, including inclusiveness, health, air quality, low crime rates, and reproductive rights, as significant factors contributing to its top ranking.

CNBC highlighted Vermont’s inclusive and welcoming state laws, noting that they provide broad protections against discrimination of all kinds. The state has been a leader in reproductive rights, becoming the first in the nation to enshrine these rights in its constitution in 2022.

The report identified no significant weaknesses in Vermont’s rankings related to quality of life issues. It praised the state’s voting process, which offers 45 days of early voting both in person and by mail, ensuring smooth electoral participation.

While Vermont excelled in quality of life metrics, CNBC’s annual project—which also evaluates states for their business environment—found the state lagging in infrastructure and access to capital. Despite these business challenges, Vermont boasts a low unemployment rate of 2.6 percent, with a population nearing 648,493 residents.

The state’s economic profile includes a top corporate tax rate of 8.5 percent and a top individual income tax rate of 8.75 percent, figures relevant for residents and businesses considering Vermont as a place to live and work.

According to The Hill, Vermont’s consistent high rankings in quality of life are a testament to its commitment to creating an inclusive, safe, and healthy environment for its residents.

India Condemns Attack on Toronto Rath Yatra Procession

Staff ReporterElection, Politics, USA 0

India has strongly condemned the egg attack on the Rath Yatra procession in Toronto and urged Canada to uphold religious safety and accountability.

India has called upon Canadian authorities to ensure accountability and safeguard the religious freedom of all communities following an attack on the 53rd annual Rath Yatra in Toronto on July 11.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal, described the incident as “despicable” and “regrettable,” asserting that it detracts from the festival’s core values of unity, inclusivity, and social harmony. “We have strongly taken up the matter with Canadian authorities to hold the perpetrators of the act accountable. We hope the Canadian Government will take necessary action to protect the religious rights of people,” Jaiswal stated.

The incident unfolded in downtown Toronto, where thousands of devotees had congregated to participate in the Rath Yatra, a religious procession organized by the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). Despite the attack, consisting of unknown individuals reportedly throwing eggs at the procession, the event continued amid shock and astonishment among the gathered participants.

The act has sparked significant response from both political and community leaders in India. Former Odisha Chief Minister and Biju Janata Dal (BJD) president, Naveen Patnaik, expressed his deep concern regarding the incident, urging the Ministry of External Affairs to formally protest. “Such incidents not only grievously hurt the sentiments of Lord Jagannatha’s devotees worldwide but also cause deep anguish to the people of Odisha, for whom this festival holds profound emotional and cultural significance,” Patnaik asserted.

He further emphasized the need for the Odisha Government to treat the matter seriously and consult with the Ministry of External Affairs to ensure a strong protest is lodged with Canadian authorities, should the media reports prove accurate.

In addition to calls for action, the event highlights ongoing concerns over religious freedoms and safety for minority communities abroad. The Rath Yatra, revered as an essential cultural and spiritual event by the Hindu community, emphasizes communal inclusivity, a principle believed to be threatened by the attack.

According to New India Abroad, the Canadian government has been approached to address and rectify the situation, ensuring the respect and protection of religious rights internationally.

Source: Original article

Trump Proposes Russia Tariffs Alongside New Ukraine Weapons Plan

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

US President Donald Trump has announced the United States will send advanced weaponry to Ukraine through NATO allies and warned of imposing severe tariffs on Russia if a peace agreement isn’t reached within 50 days.

US President Donald Trump has declared a strategic enhancement in support of Ukraine amid its ongoing conflict with Russia. Following a meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte in Washington, Trump revealed plans to furnish Ukraine with top-tier military equipment to bolster its defense efforts.

The United States’ initiative involves extensive collaboration with NATO countries. Rutte affirmed the decision, highlighting that NATO nations will facilitate the supply of necessary weaponry to Ukraine, while Europeans are expected to cover the costs.

Among the defense capabilities to be supplied are European Patriot air defense systems, which play a crucial role in countering Russia’s targeted airstrikes. These systems will be replenished by US contributions over time, according to Trump.

Although specific details regarding the military aid were sparse, Trump underscored the value of the weaponry package, hinting at its rapid deployment and significant fiscal investment. “Top-of-the-line weapons,” he noted, would soon be on their way to the Ukrainian front lines.

NATO’s intensified support arrives as a strategic move, aiming to compel Russian President Vladimir Putin to engage more earnestly in peace negotiations. Rutte alluded to the heightened pressure this development places on Russia’s leadership, suggesting it might influence their approach towards diplomatic solutions.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky expressed gratitude towards Trump’s commitment to Ukraine. In a statement shared on social media, Zelensky emphasized their joint efforts to fortify Ukraine’s defenses and work diligently toward securing peace.

In addition to military assistance, Trump articulated a robust economic strategy: the imposition of 100% secondary tariffs on Russia’s trade allies should a peace accord remain elusive. These tariffs target any nation conducting business with Russia, afflicting countries like India if they continue purchasing Russian resources.

The tariff plan aims to significantly disrupt Russia’s economic stability. By targeting countries involved in energy trade with Russia, it seeks to stifle Moscow’s primary revenue streams derived from oil and gas exports, which constitute a substantial portion of its economic framework.

Despite the stern measures, the Moscow Stock Exchange witnessed a notable rise post-announcement. Observers attributed this reaction to previous teases by Trump of a potentially more severe proclamation regarding Russia.

This initiative marks Trump’s first significant military pledge to Ukraine since reassuming the presidency. His rhetoric during the briefing demonstrated a marked shift toward a more confrontational stance against Putin, implicitly placing some responsibility for the ongoing conflict on Kyiv.

While Trump remarked on his endeavors to negotiate with Putin, he expressed disillusionment over the lack of tangible progress. Communicating his frustrations, he mentioned repeated instances where positive discussions with Putin were contradicted by subsequent Russian military actions.

Recent ceasefire negotiations between Russia and Ukraine have yet to yield a sustainable resolution, with Moscow attributing delays to Ukraine. Nevertheless, dialogue continues, with US envoy Keith Kellogg engaged in talks with Zelensky in Kyiv.

Reactions from within Russia displayed skepticism toward Trump’s strategy. Pro-Kremlin figures labeled the tariff proposals as ineffective bluffs, suggesting limited direct impacts on Russian stability.

Conversely, Trump’s decision garnered commendation from unlikely quarters, including members of the Democratic Party. Senator Jeanne Shaheen, emphasizing the humanitarian impact of deploying Patriot missiles, advocated for continued US and allied support to encourage an end to the war.

The move was met with relief by some Ukrainians, who perceived it as a gradual alignment of European influence with US policy actions. This reflection underscored the perception that European diplomatic efforts have gradually swayed US leadership to provide critical support to Ukraine.

Source: Original article

US Plans Aerial Release of Flies for Environmental Control

Staff ReporterEnvironment, USA 0

Efforts to combat an outbreak of New World screwworms across Central America have intensified as the U.S. prepares to open a new facility for breeding sterile flies near its border with Mexico.

Hundreds of millions of flies released from airplanes might sound like a nightmare scenario, but experts assert that this strategy serves as a crucial defense against a flesh-eating threat making its way toward the southwestern United States.

The outbreak of New World screwworms, which are larvae of a fly known for infesting the wounds of warm-blooded animals and slowly consuming them, has spread across Central America since early 2023. Countries including Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Belize, and El Salvador have recorded infestations after nearly two decades without significant problems.

The fly’s arrival in southern Mexico in November spurred U.S. agricultural officials to act, leading to the closure of several border-area trading ports for cattle, horses, and bison. The U.S. previously eradicated screwworm populations from 1960 to 1970 through a strategy of breeding sterile male flies and releasing them from planes to mate with wild females, effectively suppressing reproduction.

As the threat approaches the U.S., officials hope to apply the same method again, despite challenges posed by the need for more sterile flies. Currently, only one facility in Panama produces these flies, and hundreds of millions more are required to manage the outbreak effectively. On June 17, 80 U.S. lawmakers highlighted this shortfall in a letter, prompting the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to announce plans for a “fly factory” near the Texas-Mexico border.

Understanding the screwworm danger underscores the urgency of such measures. The parasitic larvae of the Cochliomyia hominivorax fly, unlike other blowflies, target living animals, explained Dr. Phillip Kaufman, head of Texas A&M University’s entomology department. These maggots inflict severe wounds, mainly on livestock such as cows and horses. Even humans and pets can occasionally fall victim.

“After mating, the female fly finds a living host, lands on its wound, and lays 200 to 300 eggs,” Kaufman said. These hatch within 24 hours, burrowing into the host’s tissue. After several days of feeding, they drop to the ground to pupate and later emerge as adult flies, noted Thomas Lansford, deputy executive director of the Texas Animal Health Commission.

Since 2023, over 35,000 screwworm infestations have been reported, with cattle comprising a significant portion of affected animals, according to the Panama–United States Commission for the Eradication and Prevention of Screwworm Infestation in Livestock (COPEG). Treatment involves wound cleaning and antiseptic measures, but the flies can easily spread if untreated, threatening ranchers’ livelihoods.

Rancher Stephen Diebel, first vice president of the Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, emphasized the necessity of daily inspections to prevent infestations and warned of the considerable economic impact they pose. Furthermore, there are no vaccines or effective repellents available, necessitating preventive measures like avoiding wounds on livestock during warm months.

Addressing the spread is complicated by the diverse ways the flies travel, ranging from livestock trading to affecting wildlife such as deer and rodents, Diebel noted.

The core of the strategy to combat screwworms is breeding sterile flies. In facilities, fly pupae undergo gamma radiation that disrupts DNA, rendering male flies infertile without harming people or animals, explained the USDA. Female flies, mating once in their 20-day lifespan, lay unfertilized eggs, leading to population decline.

While specifics on dispersal methods in the U.S. remain unconfirmed, sterile flies are typically released from planes over rural areas, keeping them out of urban environments, Kaufman stated.

Currently, COPEG produces and disperses about 100 million sterile flies weekly across affected regions in southern Mexico and Central America. The new U.S. facility plans to be set at Moore Air Base in Texas, with an estimated cost of $8.5 million, while lawmakers anticipate the factory itself could cost $300 million. Renovating an old Mexican fly factory will also require $21 million.

Despite high costs, rancher Diebel views this investment as essential for protecting the multibillion-dollar livestock industry. “Offsetting $300 million for facility costs against $10 billion in potential economic impact is a straightforward trade-off,” he said, highlighting the importance of domestic production for efficient sterile fly distribution.

Following the USDA’s June 18 announcement, plans to reopen livestock trading ports in Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico are underway, reflecting progress in efforts to curb the screwworm spread in Mexico.

As the U.S. strengthens its defenses against screwworm infestations, the agricultural community anticipates further updates on advancements from COPEG and other involved agencies.

Jay Chaudhry Among Top Richest Indian-Origin US Immigrants

Staff ReporterTechnology, USA 0

Indian-American tech entrepreneur Jay Chaudhry, CEO of the cybersecurity firm Zscaler, ranks eighth on Forbes’ 2025 list of richest immigrant billionaires in the United States.

Jay Chaudhry, the 65-year-old CEO of Zscaler, has secured a notable position among the wealthiest immigrant billionaires in the United States, as revealed by Forbes’ 2025 rankings. With a strong foothold in the tech industry, Chaudhry is the only Indian to appear in the prestigious top 10 list, ranking eighth overall.

Born in 1960 in a small Himalayan village in India, Chaudhry’s early life was characterized by significant challenges, with his hometown lacking basic amenities like electricity and running water during his school years. Despite these hardships, he excelled academically and pursued an education in engineering at Banaras Hindu University, currently known as IIT (BHU) Varanasi.

In 1980, Chaudhry moved to the United States to further his studies, marking his first experience flying in a plane. He went on to earn Master of Science degrees in electronic and computer engineering and industrial engineering and management from the University of Cincinnati, and he also studied at Harvard Business School.

Chaudhry’s journey in the tech world took a significant turn when he founded Zscaler in 2008. The company has since evolved into one of the prominent cloud-based cybersecurity firms globally, going public on Nasdaq a decade later. Today, Chaudhry and his family own approximately 40% of the company.

Before establishing Zscaler, Chaudhry, alongside his wife Jyoti, had already ventured into the tech industry by founding several other tech companies. These included SecureIT, CoreHarbor, CipherTrust, and AirDefense, all of which were subsequently acquired, paving the way for his later success.

As of 2025, Chaudhry’s net worth is estimated at $17.9 billion, which is about ₹1.49 lakh crore. He resides in Reno, Nevada, where he continues to be influential in the cybersecurity sector.

The Forbes 2025 list of richest immigrant billionaires is led by Tesla CEO Elon Musk, followed by Google co-founder Sergey Brin, Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, and entrepreneur Thomas Peterffy. Jay Chaudhry sits in eighth place, surpassing notable names such as WhatsApp co-founder Jan Koum and Kingston Technology CEO John Tu.

For the information presented in this article, the original details are drawn from the Financial Express.

Trump Delays Tariffs as Global Negotiations Intensify

Staff ReporterNews, Politics, USA 0

Despite promises of “90 deals in 90 days,” the Trump administration’s efforts to negotiate trade agreements have fallen short, with only a handful of deals likely by the initial deadline.

Donald Trump’s White House initially aimed to secure “90 deals in 90 days” following a temporary pause in implementing what the U.S. president termed “reciprocal” tariffs. However, this ambitious goal appears to be far from realization.

As the initial deadline of July 9 approaches, it’s clear that fewer than nine agreements will be completed. The original target has proven elusive, highlighting the complexities involved in trade negotiations. In a strategic move, the deadline has been extended from the previous Wednesday to August 1. Further extensions or delays remain possible as talks continue.

From the perspective of the United States, the focus is primarily on addressing trade imbalances with the 18 countries responsible for 95% of America’s trade deficit. Scott Bessent, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, emphasized the concentration on these significant trading partners as negotiations advance.

The correspondence being dispatched from the U.S. to its trading partners this week resembles earlier communications from the White House, specifically the “Liberation Day” blue board, which outlined similar concerns and objectives in trade dealings.

Essentially, the proposed tariff rates have remained consistent since they were first disclosed on April 2. The controversial calculation, initially presented as a measure of trade deficit size to indicate “the sum of all trade cheating,” persists in a similar form amid the ongoing discussions.

According to BBC News, the process illustrates the challenging dynamic of trade negotiations and the complexities of addressing longstanding trade imbalances.

Source: Original article

Indian-Origin Executives Lead Major Global Tech Companies

Staff ReporterIndia, Technology, USA 0

Indians are increasingly taking the helm at some of the world’s most influential technology companies, marking their presence on the global stage from Google to Apple.

From Sundar Pichai to the newly appointed Apple COO, Sabih Khan, an impressive array of Indian-origin executives are leading major global tech firms and serving as sources of inspiration for millions worldwide.

Sundar Pichai stands at the forefront, guiding both Google and its parent company, Alphabet. He manages numerous innovations in artificial intelligence and the consolidation of global information. Pichai, born in Madurai, Tamil Nadu, is renowned for his leadership capabilities, often said to embody a style that is exemplified by ethics and excellence among other attributes.

Succeeding Pichai, Satya Nadella serves as chairman and CEO of Microsoft, a role he assumed in 2014. Prior to his leadership at Microsoft, he was a board member at Starbucks and spearheaded research and development at Microsoft’s Online Services and Business Divisions. Nadella was born in Hyderabad, Telangana.

Arvind Krishna, the chairman, president, and CEO of IBM, has devoted over 30 years to the company. He gained notable recognition in 2016 when he was listed among “25 geniuses who are creating the future of business” due to his pioneering work in blockchain technology. His journey began in the West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh.

Over at Adobe, Shantanu Narayen has significantly transformed the company into a creative software powerhouse, particularly with iconic products like Photoshop and Acrobat. Throughout his tenure, he has also secured five patents. Narayen hails from Hyderabad, Telangana.

Thomas Kurian, in charge of Google Cloud since 2019, was honored as ‘Cloud Wars CEO of the Year for 2024’ in recognition of his industry expertise and contribution. His roots trace back to Pampady, a town in Kerala.

Meanwhile, at Micron Technology, Sanjay Mehrotra serves as the CEO, leveraging his background as a co-founder of SanDisk. His efforts in computing architecture and artificial intelligence innovations have yielded over 70 patents. Mehrotra originates from Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh.

As the current CEO of YouTube, Neal Mohan is focusing on enhancing creator tools and ensuring platform safety since his appointment in 2023. Though born to an Indian family, Mohan was raised in the United States.

Finally, Sabih Khan recently ascended to the position of Chief Operating Officer at Apple. Having served in the company for 30 years, he was elevated from his role as Senior Vice President of Operations. Khan traces his origins to Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh.

This cadre of Indian-origin executives not only exemplifies leadership within their respective companies but also represents the growing influence of Indian talent in the global tech arena.

Source: Original article

Indian-Origin Leaders Prominent in Global Tech Firms

Staff ReporterPolitics, Technology, USA 0

From Google to Apple, Indian-origin leaders are at the helm of major global tech giants, showcasing their influence and inspiring innovation worldwide.

In the competitive realm of technology, Indian-origin leaders are making significant strides, heading some of the world’s most recognized companies. This impressive cohort includes Sundar Pichai of Google and Alphabet, Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Arvind Krishna of IBM, and several others, all of whom have distinguished themselves in their fields and continue to lead global innovation.

Sundar Pichai, originally from Madurai, Tamil Nadu, serves as the CEO of both Google and its parent company, Alphabet. Pichai is known for his leadership skills, often described through a framework he calls the 7E style, which focuses on ethics and excellence. Under his guidance, Google has advanced significantly in the fields of artificial intelligence and information organization.

At Microsoft, Satya Nadella holds the positions of chairman and CEO. Assuming these roles in 2014, Nadella has transformed the company’s culture and strategic direction. Prior to his rise at Microsoft, Nadella was on the board at Starbucks and led the company’s Online Services Division’s R&D efforts. His early life was spent in Hyderabad, Telangana.

Arvind Krishna, from the West Godavari district in Andhra Pradesh, has risen to the level of chairman, president, and CEO at IBM. He has dedicated over three decades to the tech giant and has been instrumental in pioneering blockchain technology. In 2016, Wired magazine recognized Krishna as one of 25 geniuses forming the future of business.

Adobe’s evolution into a creative software powerhouse is largely credited to its CEO, Shantanu Narayen. Born in Hyderabad, Telangana, Narayen has led Adobe through a successful period, bolstering its suite of products—most notably Photoshop and Acrobat. His innovative contributions also include holding five patents.

Thomas Kurian, a native of Pampady, Kerala, has been the CEO of Google Cloud since 2019. His leadership has been widely lauded, earning him the title of ‘Cloud Wars CEO of the Year for 2024’. His strategic direction has steered Google Cloud through competitive waters effectively.

Micron Technology’s CEO, Sanjay Mehrotra, has devoted his efforts to advancing computing architecture and artificial intelligence. Mehrotra, from Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, is also the co-founder of SanDisk and is credited with more than 70 patents, underscoring his commitment to technological innovation.

Neal Mohan has been leading YouTube as its CEO since 2023. Born to an Indian family in the United States, Mohan has prioritized enhancing creator tools and ensuring platform safety, continuing the legacy of transformation at the video-sharing giant.

Newly at the forefront of Apple operations as COO is Sabih Khan. Hailing from Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, Khan has been with Apple for three decades, climbing the ranks from his position as Senior Vice President of Operations. His journey is a testament to dedication and expertise within one of the world’s largest tech companies.

These luminaries not only lead some of the largest technological enterprises but also inspire countless individuals around the globe with their dedication and innovative approaches.

Source: Original article

Dr. Kiran Dhanireddy Led Team Performs First Ever Bloodless Heart-Liver Transplant

Ajay GhoshUSA, Medicine 0

Transplant surgeons from USF Health and Tampa General Hospital (TGH) have successfully completed the world’s first bloodless heart-liver transplant, a groundbreaking procedure that marks a significant milestone in the field of transplant surgery.

Dhanireddy Kiran 02 web
Keck School of Medicine faculty member and director of Pancreas Transplantation, Kiran Dhanireddy, MD, has been appointed chief medical officer of USC Care.

Dr. Kiran Dhanireddy, vice president and chief of the USF Health and Tampa General Hospital (TGH) , and Dr. Gundars Katlaps, surgical director of the lung transplant program, both of whom are also associate professors at the USF Health Morsani College of Medicine, have achieved an unprecedented medical milestone. The team was able to perform the complex surgery without the use of blood products, making it the first recorded instance of a bloodless heart-liver transplant.

The operation underscores the importance of academic medical centers in advancing complex medical treatments. Charles J. Lockwood, MD, MHCM, executive vice president of USF Health and dean of the Morsani College of Medicine, emphasized the value of academic medical centers in providing specialized care for patients with limited options. “Our physicians have the expertise to provide complex care for patients who have no other options,” Lockwood stated. He praised the innovative problem-solving and multidisciplinary care that enable better health outcomes at academic institutions, and expressed pride in the leadership demonstrated by TGH’s physicians.

In a message posted on LinkedIn, Dr. Kiran Dhanireddy said, “Today marks a monumental milestone in my career—I am proud to announce we have successfully performed the world’s first bloodless heart-liver transplant—a groundbreaking achievement that reflects the unmatched expertise and innovation of our academic health system. Now we’ve made history with a global first. Number 1 is no longer just a title—it’s a trajectory. We have positioned ourselves as the place where complex problems are not just faced—but solved. This historic success is a testament to the brilliant, relentless, and compassionate teams who continue to push boundaries and reimagine what’s possible in patient care. We’re not just setting the bar—we’re raising it.”

Kiran Dhanireddy MD holds multiple leadership roles at Tampa General Hospital, including Vice President of the TGH Transplant Institute and Surgical Director of Liver Transplant. Additionally, Kiran serves as Executive Director of the Advanced Organ Disease & Transplantation Institute and Associate Director of the same institute. Since January 2022, Kiran has also been the Vice President of Medical Affairs at University of South Florida Tampa General Physicians. Kiran earned a Doctor of Medicine degree from Georgetown University from 1996 to 2000 and a Bachelor of Science in Biology from the same institution from 1992 to 1996.

John Couris, president and CEO of Tampa General Hospital, echoed these sentiments, noting the significance of the academic setting in facilitating access to cutting-edge technology and research. “As a true academic health system, our transplant team has access to cutting-edge technologies, innovative techniques and the latest research available,” Couris remarked. This commitment to academic excellence contributed to the Transplant Institute’s reputation as a leader in the field, attracting patients from across the nation seeking solutions to complex medical conditions.

The patient, diagnosed with both coronary artery disease and fatty liver disease as part of metabolic syndrome, had waited more than 18 months for this groundbreaking procedure. Given the need to avoid blood products, the transplant team undertook the challenge of performing a bloodless dual-organ transplant, a rarity in medical practice.

Dr. Dhanireddy highlighted the achievement as a testament to the capabilities of academic medicine, which allowed for the assembly of a team with unparalleled expertise. “The success of this first-of-its-kind procedure is a true testament to the power of academic medicine,” he said. The procedure demonstrated meticulous surgical technique and coordinated perioperative care, which are crucial in delivering optimal outcomes for patients. Dr. Dhanireddy noted that unfortunately, many patients lack access to such resources, needing to travel significant distances and face delays in care, but TGH aims to provide equitable care for patients both locally and nationwide.

While bloodless transplant surgery has existed since the first single-organ transplant in 1986, it remains uncommon in most health systems. The discipline is evolving, with the first bloodless heart-kidney transplant recorded earlier this year. As the frequency of these surgeries increases, so does the overall success and survival rate for patients.\

Beyond accommodating patients with medical contraindications or religious beliefs that preclude blood transfusions, research shows that minimizing the use of blood products has benefits such as faster recovery times and reduced infection risks. These advantages have led to advocacy for patient blood management programs aimed at optimizing the use of a patient’s own blood where possible.

Dr. Katlaps emphasized that patients already face numerous challenges, including delays and inequities in organ allocation and lack of access to specialized care. “A patient’s inability to receive blood products — whatever the reason — should not be one of them,” he stated. His team takes pride not only in making medical history but also in offering lifesaving care previously unattainable elsewhere.

According to USF Health, this historic surgery signifies a leap forward in transplant medicine, showcasing the potential for academic institutions to pioneer innovative solutions for patients worldwide.

US Airports End Shoe Removal Rule at Security Screenings

Staff ReporterSecurity, Travel, USA 0

U.S. airports will no longer require passengers to remove their shoes during security screenings, ending a long-standing requirement implemented by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has announced that the policy requiring passengers to remove their shoes during airport security screenings has been discontinued, effective immediately. This decision marks the end of a measure that has been in place across the nation since 2006.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stated that although passengers can keep their shoes on, the TSA will maintain a “multi-layered” security screening process. Passengers are still required to remove belts and coats and to separate laptops and liquids from their carry-on bags, although these rules are currently under review.

The shoe removal policy was initially enacted in response to an attempted bombing by British national Richard Reid, who attempted to detonate explosives hidden in his shoes on a flight from Paris to Miami in December 2001. Reid was subdued by fellow passengers, allowing the flight to land safely in Boston.

“Our security technology has changed dramatically. It’s evolved. TSA has changed,” Secretary Noem remarked at a news conference. “We have a multi-layered, whole-of-government approach now to security and to the environment that people anticipate and experience when they come into an airport that has been honed and it’s been hardened.”

The adjustment aligns with the intent to enhance the travel experience while maintaining the level of security that travelers expect. “It’s important we find ways to keep people safe, but also streamline and make the process much more enjoyable for every single person,” Noem added.

Some airports, including Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, Philadelphia International Airport, and Piedmont Triad International Airport in North Carolina, had already implemented the new shoe policy before the formal announcement.

Previously, those qualified for the TSA PreCheck program, such as children and other approved travelers, were exempt from removing footwear during security checks. The PreCheck program offers a fast-track screening process for approved travelers, which involves an application process and fingerprinting.

Airlines for America, a trade organization representing major U.S. airlines, expressed support for the new changes. “This policy change will go a long way in facilitating smooth, seamless and secure travel for passengers and is welcome news to the millions of people who fly every day,” said Nicholas E. Calio, president and CEO of Airlines for America, in a statement.

The removal of shoes was one of several security measures introduced following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, along with other precautions aimed at preventing similarly dangerous items from being brought aboard aircraft.

While the policy change affects the shoe removal requirement, it is part of a broader initiative to optimize the airport security experience without compromising safety measures in place since the early 2000s.

Trump Announces Tariffs on Copper and Pharmaceutical Imports

Staff ReporterPolitics, Business, USA 0

President Donald Trump has announced a new 50% tariff on all copper imports into the United States, though the timeline for its implementation remains uncertain.

President Donald Trump declared on Tuesday that a 50% tariff will be imposed on all copper imported into the U.S., continuing his administration’s pattern of leveraging tariffs as a strategic tool. However, details regarding when this new tariff will take effect are not yet clear.

“Today we’re doing copper,” Trump stated during a Cabinet meeting, indicating his administration’s decision to set the tariff at 50%.

This initiative marks the fourth broad-based tariff imposition by Trump in his second term. Previously, the administration set tariffs of 25% on imported cars and car parts, alongside 50% tariffs on imported steel and aluminum.

The White House has not yet provided CNN with any information about the timeline for enacting the copper tariffs.

The decision to impose a copper tariff follows a Section 232 investigation initiated in February, leveraging a legal framework that authorizes the president to impose tariffs for national security reasons.

Copper is integral to the manufacturing of numerous goods, including electronics, machinery, and automobiles. Imposing tariffs on copper could potentially elevate the cost of these goods for American consumers. Last year, the United States imported $17 billion worth of copper, according to data from the U.S. Commerce Department. Chile emerged as the largest supplier, exporting $6 billion worth of copper to the U.S. in 2024.

Following Trump’s announcement, copper prices soared to unprecedented levels. Copper futures in New York spiked by as much as 15%, reaching a record high of $5.68 per pound.

“I’ve been surprised it’s taken this long to get the copper tariff,” Ed Mills, a Washington policy analyst at Raymond James, remarked to CNN.

This year, copper prices have surged by 38%, reflecting a tendency to stockpile the metal in anticipation of tariff hikes.

“A 50% increase will be a massive tax on consumers of copper,” commented Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank. “Watch what Trump does, not what he says,” Hansen advised, suggesting that a staggered tariff approach might be adopted to mitigate its impact on consumers.

In addition, Trump announced impending 200% tariffs on pharmaceuticals, noting that these could be delayed to incentivize pharmaceutical companies to relocate their operations to the U.S.

Although the president had exempted pharmaceutical imports from tariffs during his first term, he has been vocal about implementing such measures, citing national security concerns. An investigation into pharmaceutical imports commenced in mid-April, potentially paving the way for these tariffs.

Trump argues that increasing domestic pharmaceutical production is crucial for reducing reliance on foreign medicine supplies. Several pharmaceutical companies have announced plans to expand their manufacturing capacities within the U.S., some of which were initiated prior to Trump’s second term beginning in January.

The announcement of possible pharmaceutical tariffs prompted a reaction from Australia’s Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, who stated that the country is “urgently seeking” more details about this development given its potential impact on billions of dollars in exports to the U.S.

Additionally, on Monday, Trump extended a pause on “reciprocal” tariffs until August 1. These tariffs, originally set to resume in April, were scheduled to restart at 12:01 a.m. ET on Wednesday. In the interim, Trump has been actively communicating with foreign leaders about potential new tariff rates, pending further negotiations.

This article has been updated to include additional context and recent developments, according to CNN.

Texas Floods Cause Fatalities on July 8, 2025

Staff ReporterNation USA, News, USA 0

More than 160 people are missing and over 110 have died due to devastating floods in Kerr County, Texas, prompting a review of the state’s emergency alert system.

Authorities in Texas are grappling with the aftermath of severe flooding that has left more than 160 individuals unaccounted for in Kerr County, central Texas. Governor Greg Abbott reported that these figures were obtained through “combined law enforcement efforts.” Additionally, at least a dozen people are missing in other parts of the state. Tragically, more than 110 fatalities have been confirmed in the region.

Governor Abbott addressed the situation in a news conference held in the heavily affected area. He announced that the state’s emergency alert system, which some have criticized in the wake of the disaster, is scheduled for discussion during a special session of the Texas legislature later this month. This review aims to address any shortcomings and improve the system’s effectiveness in future emergencies.

Just two days before the flooding, Camp Mystic, a youth camp located in Kerr County, was inspected by a state official. Records, later acquired by CNN, indicate that the camp had an emergency plan in place, and its structures, including cabins and other buildings, were certified as safe.

According to CNN, the flooding in Kerr County has been one of the deadliest weather-related events in Texas in recent years, highlighting the urgent need for ensuring the safety and preparedness of communities in flood-prone areas.

FIA New England Honors Veterans, Celebrates 249th U.S. Independence Day

Staff ReporterCommunity, USA 0

The Foundation of Indian Americans (FIA) New England celebrated the 249th Independence Day of the United States with a notable event in Northborough, Massachusetts, recognizing American war veterans and fostering cross-cultural unity.

The Foundation of Indian Americans (FIA) New England, in partnership with The Boston Group, commemorated the 249th Independence Day of the United States on June 29, 2025, in Northborough, Massachusetts. This grand occasion united diverse communities to celebrate shared values of “freedom, unity, and cross-cultural pride.”

The event commenced with a warm welcome from Jyoti Singh, a member of the FIA Board of Directors, and was emceed by Maggie Lemay, a U.S. military veteran and 9/11 survivor, who also holds the title of Ms. Continental Worldwide. Sanjay Gokhale, Vice President of FIA, led the opening ceremony with the Pledge of Allegiance. The U.S. National Anthem followed, performed by children from the Padamini Dance Academy and accompanied by a local band.

A significant highlight of the celebration was the honoring of American war veterans and local law enforcement officers. The recognition was extended to Elizabeth Barry, a U.S. Army Veteran; Bruce DeGraff, a U.S. Marine Corps Veteran; and the Northborough Police Department, represented by Chief Brian Griffin and Officer Spencer. Community leaders Meetu Gupta and Irvin Victoria King were also acknowledged for their civic contributions.

According to FIA, the veterans shared poignant memories of their military service, including reflections on World War II, creating a deeply moving experience for all in attendance. These heroes received special honors from Shruthi Purushottam, Deputy Consul General of India in Boston, FIA President Abhishek Singh, and other FIA executives.

The event also featured a surprise video message from former U.S. Congressman Joe Kennedy III, who expressed heartfelt greetings and praised the Indian American community for its ongoing contributions to American society. Subu Kota, the founder of The Boston Group, highlighted the integral role of the Indian American community within the U.S. fabric, emphasizing its longstanding commitment to the nation’s welfare and progress.

The celebration included cultural performances, live music, and a diverse array of cuisine, offering a vibrant display of Indian American pride and American patriotism. Organizers stressed the event’s core message of inclusivity, multiculturalism, and civic unity.

The FIA extended its gratitude to its key team members, including Rakesh–Deepti Kavsari, Amol–Piyusha & Pranita, Santosh–Girish Soni, Mohan Ji, Chanukya Rao, Divya Prakash, Naveen Kumar, Abhinav Yadav, Vishant Mahajan, and Himanshu Chouhan. Special thanks were also given to Mitesh & Padamini and her dance team; Santosh & Bhawana for their musical contributions; and Maharshi & Jassi, along with the American band led by Mark Femino and others, for their support in making the event a success.

IRS Permits Churches to Endorse Candidates Without Tax Penalty

Staff ReporterReligion, USA 0

The IRS has signaled that churches can endorse political candidates without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status, challenging a long-standing interpretation of the U.S. tax code’s Johnson Amendment.

The Internal Revenue Service announced in a federal court filing that churches are entitled to endorse political candidates during services without forfeiting their tax-exempt status. This decision marks a significant shift from a 70-year-old interpretation of the U.S. tax code, specifically the Johnson Amendment, which historically prohibited certain non-profit organizations, including churches, from engaging in such endorsements.

The IRS’s filing stated that communications from a house of worship to its congregation during religious services, when conducted through customary channels, do not violate the Johnson Amendment. The agency clarified that when a church discusses electoral politics from a religious perspective during services, it does not amount to participation or intervention in a political campaign, as understood within the usual meaning of these terms.

This move could lead to significant changes in how churches and religious organizations interact with political campaigns and candidates. The filing was part of a legal settlement effort in a U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, involving the IRS, the National Religious Broadcasters group, Sand Springs Church in Athens, Texas, and First Baptist Church Waksom in Waksom, Texas. The parties involved in the lawsuit argued that the Johnson Amendment infringed upon their First Amendment rights to free speech and religious expression.

President Donald Trump has previously advocated for the repeal of the Johnson Amendment, aligning with arguments presented by these religious groups. The IRS’s recent position indicates a considerable deviation from its past interpretations of the tax code concerning church involvement in political endorsements.

The lawsuit resulted in a joint motion to settle through a consent judgment, which, if approved, would prevent the IRS from enforcing the Johnson Amendment against the suing churches. However, at the time of the filing, the district court had not yet issued a ruling on the motion.

According to CNCB, these developments could influence similar cases and may lead to broader implications for the intersection of religious freedom and political expression within U.S. tax law.

Trump’s Bill Reduces Remittance Tax for Indians to 1%

Staff ReporterNation, Economy, USA 0

President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act has advanced in the Senate, featuring a reduced 1% tax on remittances, offering relief to Indian professionals and non-resident Indians (NRIs) in the U.S.

In a significant development for Indian professionals and non-resident Indians (NRIs) in the United States, President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act has managed to surmount a major hurdle in the Senate, now offering a considerably lowered remittance tax of 1%. This development is seen as a substantial relief from the originally proposed 5% tax rate, which had initially drawn widespread concern.

The updated draft of the bill now implements a mere 1% tax on remittances sent via cash, money orders, or cashier’s checks. This marks a substantial reduction from the 5% rate proposed in May, which was later downscaled to 3.5% in the House version of the bill. The reduced tax rate applies to remittance transfers not made through financial institutions or using a debit or credit card issued in the United States.

The initial draft of the bill passed by the House of Representatives in May caused alarm among many Indian professionals due to its high proposed tax, affecting non-U.S. citizens, including those on Green Cards and temporary visas like H-1B and H-2A. Remittances comprise a significant component of India’s foreign income, making the tax rate particularly relevant for Indian nationals residing abroad.

Data from the Migration Policy Institute, as cited by The Times of India, indicated that approximately 2.9 million Indians were living in the U.S. as of 2023, making them the second-largest foreign-born demographic in the country. Additionally, the World Bank reported in 2024 that India was the largest recipient of international remittances, accumulating $129 billion, with 28% of these remittances originating from the U.S.

In light of these statistics, the remittance policy is pivotal for states like Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar, where remittances are a crucial financial lifeline for millions of households.

Despite the remittance tax relief, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes contentious elements such as a $150 billion increase in military spending, mass deportation measures, and funding for a border wall. To offset these expenses, the bill proposes substantial cuts to federal programs, including Medicaid and incentives for clean energy, inciting opposition from various political factions, including divisions within the Republican Party itself.

This policy proposal has led to public disagreements, notably between President Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who lashed out at the bill as “utterly insane,” cautioning that it would jeopardize millions of American jobs.

The flag-bearing piece of legislation narrowly passed a Senate vote by 51-49, pushing it forward for further Senate discussions. According to Al Jazeera, President Trump aims to see the bill enacted by Congress before the Fourth of July.

Source: Original article

Law Targeting Nazis May Strip Citizenship from More Americans

Staff ReporterUSA, Immigration 0

The U.S. Department of Justice, under the Trump administration, is looking to expand its denaturalization efforts, placing millions of naturalized citizens at potential risk of losing their citizenship.

The Justice Department (DOJ) has traditionally employed denaturalization powers to revoke citizenship from those who falsely obtained it or hid significant parts of their past, such as former Nazis. However, a recent memo indicates a potential broadening of this scope under the current Trump administration, raising concerns among legal experts.

According to the memo, attorneys are now instructed to focus their efforts on denaturalizing individuals who may pose a “potential danger to national security.” This marks a shift that aligns with the administration’s stringent immigration policies and could affect a significant number of naturalized citizens by risking their deportation.

The efforts prioritize individuals who have committed violent crimes or are associated with gangs, drug cartels, or have engaged in fraudulent activities. The memo, issued by the head of the DOJ’s Civil Division, outlines these priorities.

Experts and officials are voicing concerns that the broader initiative may instill fear among legal immigrants, especially those critical of the Trump administration. Cassandra Burke Robertson, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University, expressed concern about this potential politicization of citizenship, stating, “The politicization of citizenship rights is something that really worries me, I think it’s just flatly inconsistent with our democratic system.”

This current effort harkens back to a McCarthy-era statute initially used to identify Communists. Over the years, it has primarily targeted war criminals, marked by the establishment of a DOJ unit in 1979 which focused on deporting individuals affiliated with the Nazis.

More historic efforts included Operation Janus under the Obama administration, focusing on identity theft in obtaining citizenship. Trump had previously attempted to extend denaturalization by establishing a specialized office at the DOJ in 2020, which was later dismantled by the Biden administration.

On returning to power, Trump has aimed to remodel immigration enforcement broadly, enlisting agencies like the FBI and U.S. Marshals in deportation efforts and scrutinizing foreign student visas. The new directive does not revive the prior office; instead, it prompts the entire Civil Division to prioritize denaturalization “in all cases permitted by law,” as per the memo. This guidance suggests that U.S. attorneys across the nation should highlight cases potentially suitable for denaturalization proceedings.

During Trump’s first term, 102 denaturalization cases were filed, compared to the 24 cases filed under Biden, stated Chad Gilmartin, a DOJ spokesperson. In Trump’s second term, five cases have been filed in its initial five months.

The DOJ clarified, “Denaturalization proceedings will only be pursued as permitted by law and supported by evidence against individuals who illegally procured or misrepresented facts in the naturalization process.” However, several current and former DOJ officials expressed concern that the memo’s broad directives could be used to expel individuals based on vague allegations.

Robertson noted that the administration might seek out historical errors in the naturalization process of political opponents, including student activists. Irina Manta, a law professor at Hofstra University, suggested the policy change could stifle free speech due to fear among citizens, stating, “I regularly observe the fear firsthand.”

Adding to this concern, Trump has suggested deporting certain American citizens, although his seriousness remains ambiguous. He has implied that the administration should potentially examine removing individuals, like criticizing businessman Elon Musk, following a disagreement over policy.

In a formal step reflecting this stance, Congressman Andy Ogles recently requested Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether Zohran Mamdani, a New York City mayoral candidate and naturalized citizen from Uganda, should be considered for denaturalization due to his political expressions in support of contentious figures.

The broader implications of these potential policy shifts remain provocative, with significant apprehension among legal professionals and immigrants distressed over what may follow, according to CNN.

Source: Original article

Trump Signs Significant Bill into Law

Staff ReporterEconomy, USA 0

President Trump signed a comprehensive reconciliation package into law, incorporating tax cuts and Medicaid reductions, marking a major political achievement for his administration following extensive negotiations with Congressional Republicans.

President Trump finalized a significant legislative accomplishment on Friday by signing into law an expansive reconciliation package that includes extended tax cuts and phased-in reductions to Medicaid, culminating after months of challenging negotiations with Republicans on Capitol Hill.

The signing took place during a Fourth of July military family picnic at the White House. Trump had aimed to have the legislation ready by Independence Day, a goal that seemed uncertain just days before. “We made promises, and it’s really promises made, promises kept, and we’ve kept them,” Trump declared from the balcony overlooking the South Lawn. He added, “This is a triumph of democracy on the birthday of democracy. And I have to say, the people are happy.”

First Lady Melania Trump, various Cabinet officials, and numerous Republican lawmakers, including Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), and Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), attended the ceremony. The event featured added spectacles such as a flyover by two B-2 bombers. These aircraft recently carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities last month.

The Senate passed its version of the bill early Tuesday morning, with Vice President Vance casting the tie-breaking vote after three Republicans opposed it. The House approved the legislation without amendments on Thursday afternoon, following extended efforts to secure support from hesitant members during a procedural vote. The final House vote was close at 218-214, with two Republicans voting against it.

Friday’s bill signing capped off a series of favorable developments for Trump, including achievements in foreign policy, a strong jobs report, and historic low apprehension numbers at the southern border. “We’ve I think had probably the most successful almost six months as a president and the presidency,” Trump stated. “I think they’re saying it was the best six months, and I know for a fact they’re saying the last two weeks, there has never been anything like it as far as winning, winning, winning.”

The legislation incorporates key elements from Trump’s 2024 campaign platform. It extends the tax cuts originally enacted in 2017, which were due to expire later this year. It also eliminates certain taxes on tipped wages and raises the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions, a contentious issue during negotiations.

The bill allocates $150 billion for border wall funding, immigration enforcement, and deportations, alongside $150 billion in new defense spending for projects like shipbuilding and the “Golden Dome” missile defense initiative. It cuts green energy incentives while boosting domestic fossil fuel production. The legislation also increases the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, alleviating concerns about a potential federal default.

Democrats have criticized the bill for its cuts to low-income health and nutrition programs, arguing that these reductions offset tax cut revenue losses but also threaten health coverage for millions. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-Calif.) delivered an extensive speech opposing the bill, claiming it would harm working families. Trump dismissed Jeffries’ remarks and Democratic criticism as a “con job.”

Despite negative polling, White House officials have downplayed criticism, contending that public opinion will improve once Republicans adequately inform constituents about the bill’s benefits, according to The Hill.

U.S. Economy: 147K Jobs Added in June, Exceeding Expectations

Staff ReporterEconomy, USA 0

The U.S. economy added 147,000 jobs in June while the unemployment rate held steady at 4.1 percent, surpassing economists’ expectations, according to the Labor Department.

The labor market continued its steady progress last month, outpacing economists’ predictions that called for 100,000 new jobs and a slight uptick in the unemployment rate to 4.3 percent. These numbers reflect the resilience of the U.S. economy, which has withstood challenges from President Trump’s extensive tariffs that have significantly raised import tax rates and fueled uncertainty about future trade relations.

Tensions over trade seemed to ease slightly as President Trump delayed or reduced some proposed tariffs initially set out in April. However, a deadline looms as the White House approaches a self-imposed cutoff on July 9 to negotiate agreements with nations affected by these tariffs. President Trump has maintained that he is prepared to re-impose significant tariffs, which could revive economic apprehension.

The June jobs report detailed sector-specific growth: the health sector saw an addition of 39,000 jobs, while social assistance jobs increased by 19,000. However, sectors such as oil and gas, construction, manufacturing, and mining saw little change, with manufacturing employment decreasing by 7,000 jobs for the month.

A notable rise in government employment contributed to the overall job growth, with 73,000 jobs added primarily at the state and local levels, while federal employment declined by 7,000 positions. Concurrently, the labor force experienced a decline of 130,000 individuals, with the workforce participation rate slightly decreasing to 62.3 percent from May’s 62.4 percent.

Amid these economic developments, the Federal Reserve has refrained from altering interest rates, holding off on cuts to evaluate the influence of tariffs and other macroeconomic factors on pricing. Inflation indicators show an upward trend with the consumer price index and the personal consumption expenditures price index recording annual increases of 2.4 percent and 2.3 percent, respectively.

There is anticipation among forecasters that the impact of tariffs on consumer prices will become more pronounced over the summer. However, uncertainties remain regarding how these import taxes will affect different points in the value chain, or if they will diminish product demand or be transferred to consumers.

President Trump has been vocal about his frustration towards the Federal Reserve’s reluctance to reduce rates, having sent a message to Fed Chair Jerome Powell urging significant rate cuts, citing substantial financial losses. Currently, U.S. inflation surpasses other regions, with the European Union achieving a 2 percent inflation rate in June, meeting the Fed’s target rate. Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, noted this accomplishment at an international conference, while Jerome Powell attributed the Fed’s static rate policy to the ongoing tariffs imposed by the White House.

According to The Hill, these economic dynamics continue to play a vital role in shaping both domestic and international financial landscapes.

Source: Original article

House Approves Tax and Spending Bill Backed by Johnson, Trump

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

House Republicans narrowly passed President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill,” with a final vote of 218-214, sending it to his desk for signing.

House Republicans successfully passed President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” on Thursday, with a tight vote margin of 218-214. The bill now awaits Trump’s signature, which is expected to take place on the Fourth of July, meeting the deadline he had set for its arrival at his desk.

The legislation’s passage did not come without challenges. GOP leaders engaged in hours of procedural votes, striving to secure the necessary support. Among those opposing the bill were two Republican representatives, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, who joined all Democrats in voting against it.

Trump was actively involved in the process, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) delivered a substantial floor speech that lasted 8 hours and 44 minutes, criticizing the legislation.

The bill’s approval represents a significant triumph for both President Trump and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.).

Beyond the legislative victory, President Trump plans to attend additional engagements. On Thursday, he will meet with former Israeli hostage Edan Alexander alongside First Lady Melania Trump. Following this meeting, he will travel to Iowa to commence the celebration of America’s 250th year with a speech at the state fairgrounds.

The original report of the bill’s passage was shared by The Hill.

Source: Original article

House GOP Leaders Strive to Unite on Trump Megabill

Staff ReporterPolitics, USA 0

GOP leaders are racing to secure alignment within their ranks to pass a pivotal Senate bill that embodies former President Trump’s domestic agenda before the impending holiday weekend.

Republican leaders face significant challenges as they attempt to unify their caucus behind a substantial Senate bill aimed at implementing key aspects of former President Trump’s agenda, including substantial tax cuts, stricter immigration policies, a pivot from green energy initiatives, and significant reductions in federal health and nutrition programs.

The endeavor comes amid resistance from both moderate Republicans concerned about increased Medicaid cuts and conservatives alarmed by a rise in deficit spending, both measures exacerbated in the Senate’s version of the legislation. This discord poses a critical test for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other GOP leaders who are under pressure to pass the bill, which demands nearly unanimous support given the slim Republican majority in the House.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a prominent member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, voiced skepticism about the bill’s ability to achieve the Trump administration’s objectives. “I know why they’re going to lobby for it, I know why the president’s going to push for it. They want to see it get done, and I get it,” Roy said, but he added, “But I think we have more work to do.”

Tensions are rising as House Republicans must decide between opposing a Senate-modified bill they originally supported or yielding to pressure for party unity and delivering Trump a legislative victory. Some, like a moderate House Republican, have expressed uncertainty about the best course of action. “Maybe I’ll get lucky and have a rough enough landing or something that I’m unable to make [it] to D.C. for a few weeks,” the member said to The Hill.

Former President Trump is actively lobbying Republicans to back the bill, with threats suggesting primary challenges against those who oppose what he calls the “big, beautiful bill.” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who opposed the House version in May, faces a MAGA-backed push to unseat him due to his expected dissent against the Senate bill.

Meanwhile, Democrats remain critical of the legislation, which includes significant cuts in low-income health and nutrition programs to fund tax reductions. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) highlighted the bill’s potential impact on constituents, questioning why Republicans, especially those in competitive districts, would support it.

With a self-imposed deadline to pass the bill by July 4, Speaker Johnson acknowledges the ambitious timeline. He stated, “We’ll see what happens in the next 24 hours,” also admitting discontent with the Senate’s modifications but recognizing the necessity to advance without alterations to avoid another Senate vote.

There are doubts regarding the House’s ability to meet this timeline, as expressed by Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) on social media. Stutzman pointed out the Senate’s “unacceptable increases to the national debt and the deficit,” making House passage challenging.

The urgency is evident as the House Rules Committee convened to discuss the bill, marking the beginning of its progression through the House. If cleared, GOP leaders plan to move forward quickly, initiating debates and votes as early as Wednesday morning. However, initial steps face obstacles. Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), aligned with the Freedom Caucus, announced opposition to the procedural rule necessary for advancing the bill, threatening a legislative standstill.

The margin is slim, with Republicans allowed only three defections if Democrats uniformly oppose the rule. Already, Harris and Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) have committed to voting against it.

Trump, undeterred, hailed the Senate’s passage and urged House Republicans to follow suit. “I thought the Senate was going to be tougher than the House. We got there. We got pretty much what we wanted,” he said, emphasizing the importance of passing the landmark bill.

A senior White House official, stressing urgency, called for the bill’s enactment in its present form by the July 4 deadline to allow Trump to sign it ceremonially on Independence Day. “The end of the road is here. The bill is finished. The bill needs to be sent to the president’s desk and it needs to be done … on or before July 4,” the official stated.

The administration is conducting an extensive effort to galvanize support, utilizing top officials, including Trump, his budget director, and heads of relevant departments, to coordinate the endeavor.

Source: Original article

GOP Leaders Work to Unite Party on Trump Megabill

Staff ReporterUSA, Economy 0

Republican leaders in the House are urgently working to unite their party behind a substantial Senate bill aimed at enacting former President Donald Trump’s domestic agenda before the upcoming holiday weekend.

The effort is proving challenging, as both moderate and conservative Republicans have expressed concerns. Moderates are troubled by the expanded cuts to Medicaid — a change made in the Senate — while conservatives are alarmed by the increased deficit spending also introduced by the Senate. These divisions threaten the bill’s passage, as the GOP holds only a slim majority in the House, necessitating nearly unanimous support from the party.

Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, expressed skepticism about the bill: “If you look at the totality of this, I don’t believe this delivers what the president, what the administration, were working to deliver on,” he said, indicating ongoing efforts to manage deficit spending.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson of Louisiana and other GOP leaders are racing against time to consolidate support for the bill. The legislation is critical to Trump’s second-term agenda, comprising sweeping tax cuts, a hardline stance on immigration, a shift away from green energy policies, and substantial reductions in federal health and nutrition programs.

House GOP members, from moderates to hard-liners, originally cautioned against a bill changed by the Senate that could be perceived as “worse.” They now face a difficult choice: abandon their initial stance to deliver a victory for Trump, or maintain their position and risk defeating the bill.

Echoing the internal struggle, a moderate House Republican remarked to The Hill, “Maybe I’ll get lucky and have a rough enough landing or something that I’m unable to make [it] to D.C. for a few weeks,” underscoring the challenge of their predicament.

Adding to the pressure, former President Trump is strongly advocating for the bill, warning House Republicans of potential primary challenges if they oppose the legislation he terms the “big, beautiful bill.” This is not an idle threat; Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who opposed the House version, has been targeted by a MAGA-super PAC, and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina faced backlash from Trump, leading to his announcement of retirement after the current term.

While Democrats cannot block the bill, they are underscoring its most controversial elements, like significant cuts to low-income health and nutrition programs — proposals aimed at funding the Republican tax cuts. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries criticized the bill, saying, “This bill won’t make life more affordable for the American people. It will make life more expensive.”

The timeline for passing the legislation adds another layer of complexity. Johnson and GOP leaders aim to meet a self-imposed deadline of July 4, requiring swift action from lawmakers.

Despite the tight timeline, there is skepticism about meeting this goal. Conservatives and moderates alike have voiced concerns about increased national debt and deficits, complicating efforts to consolidate support. Rep. Marlin Stutzman of Indiana stressed the need to ensure the bill is more fiscally responsible for future generations.

On Tuesday, the House Rules Committee held a meeting as the first step in the legislative process. Subsequent actions include convening the House to debate and vote on procedural rules before deciding on the legislation. However, progress is already facing hurdles; Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, head of the Freedom Caucus, intends to vote against the procedural rule, jeopardizing the bill’s advancement.

Trump continues to push the bill, praising the Senate’s approval and urging the House to follow suit, highlighting its significance. A senior White House official stressed the urgency of passing the bill in its current form before July 4, dismissing any notion of conferencing the House and Senate versions.

As the deadline looms, the White House is intensifying efforts to rally support, with top officials engaged in outreach to ensure the bill’s passage.

Source: Original article

Indian-American Lawmakers Criticize Senate Passage of GOP Budget Bill

Staff ReporterHealth, USA 0

Indian American lawmakers have expressed strong disapproval following the U.S. Senate’s passage of a Republican-led budget proposal that aims to significantly alter federal spending, including deep cuts to healthcare and social safety net programs while increasing funds for military and immigration enforcement.

On July 1, the U.S. Senate passed a controversial budget package that has stirred significant opposition from Indian American members of Congress. The proposal, led by Republicans, has come under fire for significant cuts to federal healthcare programs and social safety net initiatives while allocating more resources to military and immigration enforcement.

Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) criticized the Senate bill’s journey through Congress, stating, “The House Republican version of the Trump budget was already a disaster for the American people. The Senate somehow made it even worse.”

Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) described the Senate’s amendments to the budget as “selfish, cruel and expensive,” particularly criticizing the healthcare provisions. She noted, “Senate Republicans just voted to cut healthcare for millions of Americans to pay for a tax break for the rich. Americans will die so that billionaires can get a tax cut.”

Other lawmakers, including Representative Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA), weigh in on the matter, asserting that the current bill compounds the shortcomings of the original proposal. “Old version: slashed Medicaid, cut clean energy, exploded the debt. New version: slashes more Medicaid, cuts more clean energy, raises the debt even more,” said Subramanyam. He also emphasized that “Nearly 17 million Americans are projected to lose their health insurance because of the Trump Administration’s Big Ugly Bill.”

Representative Shri Thanedar (D-MI) warned of the severe implications for food security and health coverage, stating, “This bill will take food off the table of 2 million Americans and take away access to healthcare from 16 million more,” continuing, “All to give billionaires yet another tax cut. I’m heading to DC right now to vote HELL NO on this Big Ugly bill in the House.”

Echoing this sentiment, Representative Ami Bera (D-CA) underscored that Democrats are in solidarity against the bill. “House Democrats stand united against this harmful bill that will strip at least 16 million Americans of their health care. We must defeat this,” he stated.

The Senate vote was narrowly split at 51-50, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote after three Republicans—Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, and Rand Paul of Kentucky—sided with all 47 Democrats in opposing the bill.

Next, the budget bill will be reviewed by the House of Representatives, where Republicans maintain a slim majority of 220-212, making the outcome uncertain. House Democrats are anticipated to stand unanimously against the measure.

Stepping up efforts for its enactment by the Fourth of July, President Trump is expected to take a prominent role in convincing House Republicans to pass the bill.

According to New India Abroad

Source: Original article

Trump’s Birthright Citizenship View Contradicts Historical Facts

Staff ReporterNews, Politics, USA 0

The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, long interpreted to grant birthright citizenship to immigrant children born in the U.S., has become a focal point of debate following President Donald Trump’s remarks questioning its applicability.

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” This opening line of the Fourteenth Amendment has been traditionally understood by legal scholars as conferring citizenship on anyone born on U.S. soil, including the children of immigrants. However, President Donald Trump recently challenged this interpretation, claiming the amendment was intended only for descendants of enslaved individuals.

During a press conference celebrating a Supreme Court decision that partly allows the administration to push forward with ending birthright citizenship, Trump asserted, “This had to do with the babies of slaves.” While the ruling addressed lower courts’ limits to block the policy nationwide, Trump’s larger legal goal faces further challenges. He insists the framers of the amendment never intended it to apply to immigrant children.

The Fourteenth Amendment, indeed, was primarily drafted to secure rights for formerly enslaved people, as the post-Civil War era saw ex-Confederate states enacting laws severely restricting the freedoms of newly freed Black Americans. The Black Codes, as they were known, effectively sought to maintain slavery in all but name through restrictive regulations on labor, property ownership, and other civil rights.

To counteract these abuses, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 over President Andrew Johnson’s veto, granting rights and citizenship to Black residents in the South. Recognizing these protections might not endure under changing political climates, lawmakers sought to enshrine them constitutionally in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Trump’s objections rest on two points: an interpretation of the amendment’s phrasing around jurisdiction and a belief that it was never intended to cover immigrant children. Critics of Trump’s perspective point to the framers’ intentions as evidence against his claims.

Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan, who drafted the amendment’s language, articulated its purpose was to declare that every person born in the U.S. was a citizen. He clarified, however, that the provision did not apply to children of foreign diplomats, indicating that other immigrant groups were included.

This understanding is further illustrated during Senate debates. Senator Edgar Cowan of Pennsylvania expressed fears that the amendment would lead to demographic upheaval by granting citizenship to immigrant children. His concerns, voiced during discussions, were especially focused on the Roma community in Pennsylvania and Chinese immigrants in California. However, Senator John Conness of California defended the amendment, stating it would rightfully include children of Chinese immigrants.

Though Cowan’s apprehensions highlighted racial and ethnic biases of the time, the broader consensus among the amendment’s supporters, both then and in judicial interpretations such as the 1898 United States v. Wong Kim Ark decision, was that birthright citizenship was meant for all born on U.S. soil, regardless of parental nationality.

The Supreme Court in Wong Kim Ark upheld that individuals born in the U.S. to immigrant parents were citizens, setting a crucial precedent that remains today. Despite Trump’s stance, the recent court decision did not directly support his interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rather, it addressed procedural aspects, limiting lower courts from issuing broad injunctions, effectively opening pathways to potentially uneven application across states.

Trump’s reading challenges the way millions of American families of European descent historically acquired citizenship. While current debates center on Asian or other non-European immigrant communities, European immigrants benefited from broad interpretations of existing laws. The framers focused then on the citizenship eligibility of Asian immigrants, not Europeans, under the original 1790 Naturalization Act provisions.

If Trump’s interpretation prevailed, the American identity and citizenship path for many with immigrant ancestors would be in question. The historical record, however, underscores a longstanding recognition of birthright citizenship as foundational to America’s national identity, bridging diverse origins under one citizenry.

Legal experts assert that the history is clear: the Fourteenth Amendment’s birthright citizenship clause was intended to be inclusive. Originalism, a judicial philosophy favored by conservatives, emphasizes interpreting the Constitution as understood at its inception, and within this framework, the historical context affirms the broader application of the citizenship clause.

For now, as legal battles continue, the understanding established since 1868 – that birthright citizenship applies to all born in the U.S. – remains valid, although its future is potentially at the mercy of ongoing legal interpretations and political intentions.

Source: Original article

The American Telugu Association (ATA) successfully convened its Board Meeting and Selected the Baltimore Convention Center for the 19th ATA Conference and Youth Convention.

Staff ReporterCommunity, USA 0

DSC02222The American Telugu Association (ATA) held its Board Meeting on Saturday, June 28, 2025, at the APA Hotel Woodbridge in New Jersey. The event began with a devotional prayer song, followed by graceful classical dance performances. The board discussed recently conducted events, upcoming priorities, and partnerships, and approved the site and dates for the 19th ATA Conference.

Activities: During the board meeting, President Jayanth Challa highlighted several impactful initiatives that ATA has recently undertaken. These include a strategic collaboration with IIT Hyderabad to develop educational programs for students, as well as the celebration of Mother’s Day and Women’s Day across 12 U.S. cities. He also emphasized ATA’s focus on community engagement through eventsDSC02100 such as ATA Days, sports activities, 5K runs, yoga sessions, and community clean-up drives. Additionally, ATA has hosted a series of webinars addressing student concerns, health awareness, and immigration issues. Further initiatives include the launch of SAT preparation courses, IT training programs, and plans to expand health and fitness activities across multiple cities.  Looking ahead, ATA will host Start-up Cubes competitions in six major cities to promote innovation and help transform promising ideas into successful ventures. ATA is also advancing support for small businesses and women entrepreneurs, especially in the non-IT sector, through a series of awareness seminars that will guide participants from business setup to scalable operations. Further DSC02340strengthening its service efforts, ATA is partnering on clean water projects to empower NRIs to support development initiatives in their hometowns and villages across Telugu-speaking states. In addition, A presentation was given on Krishivaas, an AI-based mobile app developed by Agribridge, which aims to assist rural farmers in improving agricultural productivity while enabling NRIs to contribute toward enhancing farmer livelihoods.

Secretary and Treasurer Reports: Secretary Sainath Boyapalli and Treasurer Srikanth Gudipati presented their respective reports, along with updates from various standing and special committees. The Treasurer reportDSC02100 showcased the tradition of providing full transparency on ATA finances.

ATA Vedukalu: Seva Days in ATA President-Elect Satish Reddy announced the launch of “ATA Seva Days” in December 2025, which will culminate in the ATA Vedukalu Grand Finale on December 27, 2025, at Ravindra Bharathi in Hyderabad.

ATA 19the Conference and Youth Convention: The ATA Board unanimously approved the plan to host the 19th ATA Conference & Youth Convention from July 31 to August 2, 2026, at the Baltimore Convention Center in Baltimore, Maryland. Board members emphasized that Baltimore’s central location in the northeastern corridor makes it an DSC02055ideal choice for the convention. The event will take place under the leadership of ATA President Jayanth Challa. The ATA Board also reviewed and approved the budget for the upcoming national conference.

Appreciation to the NJ Team: The meeting concluded with warm appreciation for the New Jersey team for their excellent coordination and hospitality. ATA members and Board of Trustees from across the country participated in the event.

Attendees: The meeting was attended by President Jayanth Challa. President-Elect Satish Reddy, Secretary Sainath Boyapalli, Treasurer Srikanth Gudipati, Joint Secretary Sharada Singireddy, Joint Treasurer Vijay Reddy Thupally, Executive Director Narsi Reddy Gaddikoppula, along with members of the Board of Trustees, Kashivishwanath Kotha, Kishore Guduru, Maheedhar Muskula, Narsimha Reddy Dhyasani, Raghuveer Maripeddi, Raju Kakkerla, Ram Mattapalli, Ramakrishna Reddy Ala, RV Reddy,  Santosh Koram, Sreedhar Kanchanakuntla, Sridhar Banala, Srinivas Dargula, Sudheer Bandaru, Venkatram Reddy Ravi, Vijay Kundoor, Vinod Koduru, Vishnu Madhavaram,  Regional  Coordinators, Standing Committee Members, Advisors and Past Presidents  from various cities, who have been actively serving the community participated in large numbers.

Next Board Meeting: It was decided to conduct the next board meeting in Baltimore on October 25th, 2025.

For more information, please visit: www.ataworld.org

Justice Department Intensifies Denaturalization Drive, Raising Constitutional Concerns

Staff ReporterImmigration, Cover, USA 0

The Justice Department is increasingly focusing on stripping U.S. citizenship from certain naturalized Americans. According to a memo dated June 11, DOJ leadership is instructing attorneys to prioritize denaturalization in cases involving naturalized citizens who have committed specific crimes. The directive also grants U.S. attorneys more authority in deciding when to pursue such actions. This policy shift targets individuals not born in the United States, and as of 2023, nearly 25 million immigrants had obtained U.S. citizenship through naturalization.

The new emphasis on denaturalization has already produced results. On June 13, a judge revoked the citizenship of Elliott Duke, an American military veteran originally from the United Kingdom who uses they/them pronouns. Duke had been convicted of distributing child sexual abuse material, a crime they later admitted to committing even before becoming a U.S. citizen.

Historically, denaturalization was a prominent tool during the McCarthy era in the late 1940s and early 1950s. It was further utilized during the Obama administration and expanded under President Trump’s first term. The process has typically targeted individuals who concealed past crimes or affiliations with banned organizations—such as the Nazi Party or communist groups—on their citizenship applications.

In his memo, Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate emphasized the importance of this effort: “The Civil Division shall prioritize and maximally pursue denaturalization proceedings in all cases permitted by law and supported by the evidence.”

This renewed focus aligns with the Trump administration’s broader effort to reshape the U.S. immigration system. President Trump has made immigration policy a central issue in his governance, seeking to end birthright citizenship and reduce refugee admissions. These moves reflect a fundamental redefinition of who is entitled to American citizenship.

However, constitutional scholars and immigration experts have expressed significant alarm about this denaturalization push. Cassandra Robertson, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University, noted that the DOJ’s reliance on civil litigation for denaturalization raises serious concerns. In civil court, those targeted do not have the right to government-appointed attorneys, the standard of proof is lower, and cases can be resolved more quickly.

Robertson warned, “Stripping Americans of citizenship through civil litigation violates due process and infringes on the rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.”

Still, the move has supporters. Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation endorsed the initiative, stating, “I do not understand how anyone could possibly be opposed to the Justice Department taking such action to protect the nation from obvious predators, criminals, and terrorists.” Regarding concerns over legal representation, he added, “Nothing prevents that alien from hiring their own lawyer to represent them. They are not entitled to have the government — and thus the American taxpayer — pay for their lawyer.”

He further argued, “That is not a ‘due process’ violation since all immigration proceedings are civil matters and no individuals — including American citizens — are entitled to government-furnished lawyers in any type of civil matter.”

Neither the DOJ nor the Trump White House commented on the matter.

The June 11 memo significantly broadens the categories of offenses that could trigger denaturalization. These include crimes related to national security and fraud against individuals or the government, such as Paycheck Protection Program loan fraud or Medicaid and Medicare fraud.

Sameera Hafiz, policy director at the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, described the administration’s new approach as “very shocking and very concerning.” She stated, “It is kind of, in a way, trying to create a second class of U.S. citizens,” implying that naturalized citizens remain vulnerable to losing their status despite having followed legal processes.

Adding to these concerns, the memo grants federal attorneys the discretion to pursue denaturalization cases beyond the listed categories. “These categories do not limit the Civil Division from pursuing any particular case,” the memo reads, further noting that priorities may include “any other cases referred to the Civil Division that the Division determines to be sufficiently important to pursue.”

Steve Lubet, professor emeritus at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law, found this language troubling. “Many of the categories are so vague as to be meaningless. It isn’t even clear that they relate to fraudulent procurement, as opposed to post-naturalization conduct,” he observed.

Von Spakovsky countered that the government is right to be uncompromising. “When we extend the opportunity for naturalization to aliens, we are granting them a great privilege — the privilege of becoming a U.S. citizen,” he said. “Anyone who has abused the privilege of the opportunity of becoming a U.S. citizen should have that citizenship revoked when they engage in such reprehensible behavior.”

Lubet also pointed out the broader implications for families, particularly children who derived citizenship through a naturalized parent. “People who thought they were safely American and had done nothing wrong can suddenly be at risk of losing citizenship,” he said.

The DOJ did not address questions about how children of denaturalized parents would be affected or what would happen if individuals were rendered stateless.

The case of Elliott Duke appears to be an early example of how the new denaturalization efforts might play out. Duke, who became a U.S. citizen in January 2013, was found to have started distributing child sexual abuse material while serving in Germany in 2012. Duke relinquished their U.K. citizenship to become an American. The DOJ filed the case in February in Louisiana, citing both the prior conviction and Duke’s failure to disclose criminal activity during the naturalization process.

During the legal proceedings, Duke struggled to secure representation and could not attend court in Louisiana. “My heart shattered when I read the lines [of the order]. My world broke apart,” Duke said.

Shumate, in a statement, warned, “If you commit serious crimes before you become a U.S. citizen and then lie about them during your naturalization process, the Justice Department will discover the truth and come after you.”

Laura Bingham, executive director of the Temple University Institute for Law Innovation and Technology, cautioned that the Duke case sets a worrying precedent. “Citizenship is not supposed to be something that you can continuously open up for some people, and you can’t for others,” she said.

Historically, denaturalization surged during the McCarthy era, with over 22,000 cases filed annually. “At the height of denaturalization, there were about 22,000 cases a year… It was huge,” Robertson recalled. However, a 1967 Supreme Court ruling curtailed the practice, citing its incompatibility with democratic values.

From that point until the Obama era, denaturalization became rare. The Obama administration revived it with initiatives like Operation Janus, which sought out potential naturalization fraud, especially linked to national security concerns.

Trump’s first term saw further expansion, with a preference for pursuing denaturalization through civil rather than criminal courts. Although Robertson questions how many cases will meet the criteria outlined in the recent memo, she fears the aggressive push may target individuals with minimal infractions. “It fits in with the other ways that we’ve seen immigration enforcement happening,” she said.

This recent policy shift marks a significant chapter in U.S. immigration enforcement, raising crucial questions about due process, equal protection, and the long-term security of naturalized citizenship.

US Embassy in India Emphasizes Strict Visa Screening and Social Media Disclosure as National Security Measure

Staff ReporterImmigration, Cover, USA 0

The United States Embassy in India has reiterated the stringent vetting procedures tied to its visa policies, describing each visa adjudication as a matter of national security. In a statement posted on the social media platform X, the embassy highlighted the requirement for all applicants to provide complete details of their social media presence over the last five years while applying for nonimmigrant visas.

“Visa applicants are required to list all social media usernames or handles of every platform they have used from the last 5 years on the DS-160 visa application form. Applicants certify that the information in their visa application is true and correct before they sign and submit,” stated the US Embassy in a recent post.

This disclosure requirement, according to the embassy, is an integral part of the broader national security screening process employed by the United States. Failing to comply with this requirement could have serious consequences. “Omitting social media information could lead to visa denial and ineligibility for future visas,” the post further warned.

This advisory is part of a broader campaign by the embassy to inform and caution visa applicants about the importance of accuracy and transparency in their applications. The embassy’s post included digital posters reiterating the security aspect of the visa process. One poster read, “Every U.S. visa adjudication is a national security decision,” and emphasized, “The United States requires visa applicants to provide social media identifiers on visa application forms. We use all available information in our visa screening and vetting.”

In a related update earlier this month, the embassy had urged applicants falling under F, M, or J non-immigrant visa categories to make their social media accounts public. This recommendation was made to aid US authorities in verifying applicants’ identities and establishing their admissibility under American law. These visa categories include F and M for students and J for exchange visitors.

The embassy elaborated that since 2019, the United States has mandated the disclosure of “social media identifiers” as part of both immigrant and non-immigrant visa applications. This long-standing requirement, according to the embassy, is vital to national security and helps immigration authorities thoroughly vet each applicant.

The embassy’s statements come amid a wider crackdown on immigration in the United States. Recently, the Trump administration intensified enforcement actions in Los Angeles, targeting immigration violations more aggressively. In light of this, the US Embassy in India has stepped up its communication, providing frequent updates on policy and legal expectations for visa applicants.

On June 24, the embassy issued another warning, stating that immigration law enforcement had been stepped up across the country. The message was unambiguous—those found violating immigration laws would face strict penalties, including detention, deportation, and permanent ineligibility for future visas.

Adding to this, the embassy’s statement noted, “The US had increased enforcement of immigration laws, and violators would face detention, deportation and permanent consequences for future visa eligibility.” The warning was not limited to overstays or misrepresentation; it also made it clear that illegal entry into the United States would result in jail time and removal from the country.

This was not the only caution issued during the month. On June 19, the embassy released another strongly worded statement reminding applicants that obtaining a US visa is not a guaranteed right but a discretionary privilege. It emphasized that screening and scrutiny continue even after a visa is issued. Authorities in the US reserve the right to revoke a visa if the holder is found in violation of any laws.

The embassy said, “A US visa was a privilege, not a right,” underscoring that post-issuance reviews are routine and can result in visa cancellation if necessary. It further added that involvement in illegal activities, including drug use or breaking US laws while in the country on a student or visitor visa, could severely impact one’s ability to receive future visas.

This line of messaging from the US Embassy in India has been consistent throughout the month. The campaign has included reminders that although the US continues to welcome legal travelers, any attempt to enter the country illegally or abuse the visa system will not be tolerated.

Reiterating this stance, the embassy made a significant statement on June 16, asserting that the United States “will not tolerate those who facilitate illegal and mass immigration to the US.” This message also revealed a policy shift: the US had introduced “new visa restrictions” aimed specifically at foreign government officials and individuals who violate immigration laws.

This multi-pronged approach by the US government reflects a broader tightening of immigration and visa processes, especially in the wake of mounting concerns around illegal immigration. With policies targeting both individual applicants and those facilitating unlawful entry, the US is sending a clear signal about the importance of legal compliance.

By highlighting these issues through multiple channels and on various dates, the US Embassy in India is working to ensure that prospective travelers are well aware of the rules and expectations. The detailed advisories, warnings about visa ineligibility, and emphasis on national security collectively serve to underline the gravity with which the US government views visa applications.

These measures not only aim to safeguard national interests but also serve as a deterrent for those considering bypassing legal immigration processes. By requiring disclosure of social media identifiers, encouraging transparency, and increasing legal enforcement, the United States is fortifying its immigration system against potential risks.

At the same time, the US government continues to stress that it welcomes legal immigration and supports those who abide by the rules. But any deviation from lawful practices will result in serious and lasting consequences.

The embassy’s message, repeated throughout June, is unambiguous: compliance with visa rules, honesty in the application process, and adherence to US laws are non-negotiable. The US authorities are equipped to detect discrepancies and enforce immigration laws without hesitation.

From urging public visibility of social media accounts to warning against drug use and law violations, the embassy has rolled out a series of reminders to leave no room for misunderstanding. These reminders serve both as guidance for sincere applicants and a deterrent for those contemplating any kind of misuse of the system.

Ultimately, the consistent tone and content of the embassy’s advisories reflect a strategic policy direction that prioritizes national security while maintaining opportunities for legal entry. Through transparency, accountability, and firm enforcement, the United States aims to maintain the integrity of its immigration system.

Shifting Social Security Rules Push Retirement Age Higher: How Americans Can Strategize Early Retirement Plans

Staff ReporterEconomy, Cover, USA 0

For many years, the age of 65 has represented a symbolic point at which Americans envisioned hanging up their work boots and enjoying retirement. However, due to a series of gradual legislative changes, the Social Security system is moving the goalposts. Starting in 2025, individuals born in 1959 will reach full retirement age (FRA) at 66 years and 10 months. For everyone born in 1960 or later, the FRA will be a full 67 years. While this shift might appear minor, its financial effects are far from negligible, particularly for those considering retiring early.

These changes reflect long-term policy decisions intended to keep the Social Security system financially sustainable. Understanding how the adjustments impact benefits and creating a financial plan tailored to these evolving realities is crucial for ensuring a comfortable retirement.

Understanding the Adjustment to Full Retirement Age

The phased increase in the full retirement age can be traced back to the 1983 Social Security Amendments, which were designed to improve the program’s long-term viability. These amendments incrementally raised the FRA from the longstanding age of 65 to 67. The implementation has been gradual, increasing by two months for each birth year.

For example:

  • Those born in 1958 face an FRA of 66 years and 8 months
  • Individuals born in 1959 will reach FRA at 66 years and 10 months
  • Anyone born in 1960 or after will face an FRA of 67

Though people can start claiming Social Security as early as age 62, doing so comes with a permanent reduction in benefits. For those born in 1959, claiming benefits at 62 results in about a 29% decrease in monthly payments. The cut increases to 30% for those born in 1960 or later.

On the other hand, delaying benefits past FRA can result in an 8% annual boost, continuing until age 70. If you wait until then, you can receive up to 32% more each month. These numbers can significantly impact your long-term financial picture.

How to Handle the Income Gap Before Full Benefits

While many workers aim to retire before hitting FRA, doing so without careful planning can harm long-term financial health. Several strategies can help bridge the income gap from early retirement until full Social Security benefits become available.

One practical method is phased retirement. Instead of leaving the workforce entirely, you might negotiate a lighter schedule—working three or four days per week. Even working 15 to 20 hours weekly can help cover essential expenses and slow the depletion of your savings.

Another recommended approach is building a financial buffer. Experts advise saving enough to cover 18 to 24 months of living expenses in a high-yield savings or money market account. This safety net allows you to avoid dipping into long-term investments during volatile market periods.

Unused personal assets can also generate income. For instance, homeowners might consider renting out a spare room, potentially bringing in $700 to $1,000 per month. If you live in an urban area, leasing your driveway for parking could yield $150 to $300 per month.

There’s also the option of taking on a bridge job that offers both pay and benefits. Employers like Costco, Home Depot, and Trader Joe’s often hire part-time workers and provide health coverage for those working 20 to 28 hours weekly. These roles are especially attractive for early retirees looking for flexibility and medical benefits.

Making Withdrawals Work for You

If you retire before age 65 or delay claiming Social Security, your finances will depend heavily on personal savings. Using tax-efficient withdrawal strategies can minimize your tax burden and help your money go further.

One approach is to withdraw from taxable brokerage accounts first. This avoids early withdrawal penalties and allows retirement accounts to continue growing in a tax-advantaged environment.

You can also tap into Roth IRA contributions at any time without penalties or taxes, as long as you only withdraw the contributions and not the earnings. This provides an additional source of tax-free income.

Keeping your Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) low is another valuable tactic. A lower MAGI can help you qualify for subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, which can dramatically reduce health insurance costs before you’re eligible for Medicare at age 65.

Generating Side Income Can Help Too

If you’re looking for extra income without the responsibilities of a full-time job, side gigs can offer flexibility and supplemental cash flow. Tutoring, for example, pays between $30 and $50 per hour and can be done on your schedule. Other options include pet sitting, dog walking, or selling crafts through platforms like Etsy.

Prepare for the Possibility of Future Policy Changes

Though the FRA currently caps at 67, ongoing discussions in Washington suggest it could rise further. Some proposals have floated the idea of increasing it to 68 or even 69, citing long-term funding concerns for the Social Security system. While these are not yet law, staying prepared for further changes is wise.

To stay ahead, build a plan that allows for delayed benefits if necessary. Emergency savings and alternative income sources offer greater financial flexibility. Regularly reviewing your retirement income plan will also help you adapt to any policy shifts.

Conclusion: Retirement on Your Own Terms

The gradual rise in Social Security’s full retirement age might seem like a bureaucratic detail, but for millions of Americans, it redefines when and how retirement can happen. Without planning, it can mean smaller monthly checks and more years of work. However, by strategically saving, leveraging assets, working part-time, and utilizing smart withdrawal tactics, you can take control of your financial future.

Retirement shouldn’t be defined by a government schedule. With a solid plan in place, you can retire when you’re ready—on your own terms.

By recognizing the impact of changing policies and preparing accordingly, you give yourself the freedom to shape your own retirement journey.

House Passes Bill to Deport Noncitizens Convicted of Drunk Driving

Staff ReporterImmigration, Cover, USA 0

The U.S. House of Representatives on Friday passed a bill that would mandate the deportation of noncitizens convicted of driving under the influence, according to a report by Breitbart. The legislation, titled the Jeremy and Angel Seay and Sergeant Brandon Mendoza Protect Our Communities from DUIs Act, was put forward by Representative Barry Moore, a Republican from Alabama. The bill is named in remembrance of victims who lost their lives due to accidents caused by intoxicated migrant drivers.

Representative Moore introduced the legislation to honor Jeremy and Angel Seay, a couple from his district, who were tragically killed when a noncitizen driving under the influence struck them while they were riding a motorcycle. Speaking to the Alabama Daily News, Moore said, “Their lives were cut short by the senseless act.” He added, “Tragedies like this are not uncommon across this country,” emphasizing the wider impact of such incidents involving impaired driving by noncitizens.

The bill has ignited a heated debate in Congress, receiving overwhelming support from Republican lawmakers. Most Republicans view the legislation as a necessary measure to safeguard American communities from individuals who repeatedly break laws and endanger lives through reckless behavior such as drunk driving. The bill aims to amend existing immigration policy by making DUI convictions grounds for mandatory deportation.

In contrast, 160 Democrats voted against the bill, raising concerns about the potential for overly broad enforcement and its implications for immigration justice. Opponents argue that while DUI offenses are serious, automatic deportation removes the opportunity for due process or context to be considered, especially for immigrants who may have lived in the U.S. for extended periods or have deep family and community ties.

Despite the partisan split, the legislation’s passage in the House marks a significant step in the ongoing political effort to link public safety and immigration enforcement. The bill now moves to the Senate, where its future remains uncertain, particularly given the different power dynamics and legislative priorities in that chamber.

Representative Moore, in advocating for the legislation, has highlighted personal tragedies such as those experienced by the Seay family to bring attention to what he sees as preventable deaths caused by lax immigration enforcement. By attaching specific names to the bill, including that of Sergeant Brandon Mendoza, a police officer killed in a similar incident, Moore is stressing the real-world consequences of policy gaps. Mendoza’s case, like that of the Seays, has become a symbol in political discussions about the intersection of immigration and criminal law.

“Their lives were cut short by the senseless act,” Moore repeated in statements to the press, underscoring the emotional weight behind the legislation. His remarks reflect a broader Republican viewpoint that public safety should take precedence in immigration decisions, especially when there is a criminal record involved.

The bill’s language stipulates that any noncitizen convicted of driving under the influence would be subject to mandatory removal from the United States. Supporters argue that the measure closes a loophole that allows dangerous individuals to remain in the country despite endangering others through impaired driving. Critics, however, caution that the legislation could lead to disproportionate punishment and may particularly impact certain immigrant communities more heavily than others.

Immigration rights groups and some Democratic lawmakers have expressed concerns that such legislation could further criminalize immigrant populations and erode trust between law enforcement and communities. They argue that while preventing DUI-related deaths is important, a one-size-fits-all deportation policy fails to take into account rehabilitation efforts, family situations, and other mitigating circumstances.

Still, proponents believe the law will serve as a deterrent to noncitizens who might otherwise engage in reckless behavior. By introducing automatic consequences for DUI convictions, supporters contend that the law strengthens both immigration policy and public safety.

The bill’s naming after specific victims adds a human face to what is otherwise a policy discussion, which may help in gaining public support. The use of personal stories has become a common legislative strategy to create empathy and urgency around specific issues, and Moore’s bill is a prominent example.

While the political divide on immigration-related bills continues to grow, this legislation’s focus on DUI offenses could garner some bipartisan interest in the Senate, especially among lawmakers who prioritize public safety. However, it is expected that the bill will face stronger opposition in the Senate, where Democratic control and a more moderate stance on immigration issues could result in amendments or outright rejection.

For now, the bill’s approval in the House reflects a broader Republican push to tighten immigration enforcement and prioritize citizen safety, especially in cases involving criminal behavior. Whether or not this bill becomes law, it has already sparked a national conversation about how the U.S. should handle immigration enforcement in cases involving criminal activity, and how policy can be crafted to prevent further tragedies like those that took the lives of Jeremy and Angel Seay.

With its passage, the House has signaled its stance on the matter, placing the burden of next steps on the Senate. If the bill passes there, it could significantly alter how DUI offenses are treated in the context of immigration law, potentially impacting thousands of noncitizens across the country.

Until then, the debate over balancing compassion in immigration policy with accountability for criminal conduct is likely to continue, both in Congress and among the American public.

USCIS to Change Text Alert Number Starting July 1: Applicants Urged to Save New Contact

Staff ReporterImmigration, USA 0

Beginning July 1, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will implement a significant change in how it communicates via text messages with applicants. The federal agency, which oversees lawful immigration to the United States, has announced it will discontinue its current text alert number and begin using a new one.

Until now, USCIS has sent text messages to applicants from the number 468-311, which many came to recognize as GOV-311. This number will be retired, and all future messages will instead come from the new number 872466. The numeric sequence represents USAIMM, an abbreviation for “U.S.A. Immigration.” The agency’s move aims to improve clarity and foster trust among those receiving these messages.

This transition is particularly important for applicants who rely on USCIS text updates, such as notifications about the status of their immigration cases or reminders for scheduled appointments. The agency is encouraging everyone who receives these updates to save the new number in their contacts. Doing so, they say, will help avoid misidentifying official USCIS messages as spam or fraudulent texts.

The use of text alerts by USCIS is targeted primarily at applicants who opt for electronic communication. This preference is indicated by filing Form G-1145, which allows individuals to receive notifications via text and email. The text messages typically include a receipt number and guidance on how to check the status of a case on the USCIS website.

In a statement, USCIS clarified that the reason behind the number switch is to make it easier for applicants to recognize messages from the agency. It also seeks to improve the public’s confidence in the legitimacy of the communications they receive. The agency explained: “Effective July 1, 2025, USCIS will no longer send text (SMS) messages from the phone number 468-311 (GOV-311). Our new number will be 872466 (USAIMM).”

Form G-1145, officially known as the E-Notification of Application/Petition Acceptance, plays a supportive role in the immigration application process. While it does not directly confer any immigration benefit or legal status, many applicants attach it to other USCIS forms—such as Form I-485, used for applying for lawful permanent residency—to ensure they receive prompt acknowledgment when their documents are accepted. The form provides a receipt number and directs applicants to the tools they need to track case progress online, adding convenience and assurance in a process that can otherwise feel uncertain.

USCIS’s decision to update its text message system aligns with its broader push toward improving communication and technological efficiency. The new number is intended to reflect the agency’s identity more clearly and reduce the risk of applicants missing important updates due to unfamiliar sender information.

This change to the text alert system follows another update from USCIS earlier in June, which affected all new applications for permanent residency. The agency now requires applicants to submit an updated medical examination form with each new green card application. This marks a shift from the previous policy, where applicants could reuse medical forms indefinitely. The updated requirement is part of a series of recent adjustments in USCIS procedures.

Back in March, a more abrupt change in multiple immigration application forms caused widespread confusion among applicants and immigration lawyers. The sudden implementation of new forms, without sufficient notice, led to concerns and legal action. Immigration attorneys filed a lawsuit in response, urging the agency to provide a smoother transition. USCIS responded by modifying its policy and offering at least a two-week grace period for the new forms to become mandatory, giving applicants more time to adjust to the updated requirements.

In addition to procedural updates, USCIS continues to urge applicants to be vigilant about scams. The agency emphasized that it never requests payment or passwords via text message. If an applicant receives a suspicious text claiming to be from USCIS, the advice is clear: do not respond, and instead report the message through the official USCIS website. This warning serves as a reminder that scammers often attempt to exploit applicants during periods of administrative change.

Scammers have been known to mimic official government communications, making it essential for recipients to verify the source of any message. Saving the new 872466 number in a contact list will help reduce the risk of falling victim to such frauds. Additionally, individuals should remain wary of unsolicited messages requesting sensitive information or financial transactions.

With the July 1 transition date approaching, USCIS has provided straightforward guidance: individuals who receive text updates should immediately add the new number to their phone contacts and stop responding to or expecting valid messages from the former 468-311 number. “USCIS recommends that users add the new number to their contacts and disregard any texts from the old number beginning July 1,” the agency stated.

This measure is part of the agency’s continuing efforts to modernize and streamline its services while maintaining security and transparency for applicants. As the immigration process involves numerous steps, forms, and deadlines, clear communication from USCIS plays a vital role in ensuring that applicants remain informed and compliant.

To sum up, the main takeaway for all USCIS applicants is to update their contact list with the new number 872466, stay alert for official notifications, and continue using Form G-1145 to receive electronic updates. These small but crucial actions can help applicants avoid unnecessary delays or complications in their immigration journey.

By making this simple yet impactful adjustment in its messaging system, USCIS hopes to ensure that its communications are immediately recognizable and trusted. The agency’s recent actions, including the rollout of a new number and improvements to policy transparency, reflect its broader aim of providing better service in a landscape where timely and clear communication is more essential than ever.

In conclusion, while the change may seem minor, it represents a continuing evolution in USCIS’s approach to applicant engagement. By focusing on clarity, responsiveness, and fraud prevention, the agency aims to foster a more secure and streamlined process for those navigating the complexities of the U.S. immigration system. Applicants should take note, act accordingly, and remain cautious to ensure that their interactions with USCIS remain safe and effective.

Understanding the Final Shift in Social Security Retirement Age: What It Means for Future Retirees

Staff ReporterUSA, Economy, Finance 0

Changes to the Social Security retirement system have not come unexpectedly. Instead, they are part of a carefully phased plan initiated in 1983 to ensure the long-term stability of the Social Security trust fund. This final phase marks the completion of a broader reform strategy intended to reflect the realities of longer life spans and shifting demographic and economic circumstances in the United States. As a result, those who are approaching retirement need to be fully aware of what these adjustments mean, particularly when it comes to the Full Retirement Age (FRA).

The Full Retirement Age is the point at which individuals are eligible to receive 100 percent of their Social Security benefits. Under the current system, individuals born in 1959 will reach their FRA at the age of 66 years and 10 months. For people born in 1960 or after, the FRA is set at age 67. This shift directly affects not only the size of monthly benefit payments but also the timing of when one should ideally start collecting them. The change in FRA is a crucial element that current and future retirees must factor into their planning.

This increase in FRA is not arbitrary but is rooted in the structural challenges facing the Social Security system. Americans are living longer than previous generations, which means they spend more years collecting retirement benefits. Without reforms like this one, the Social Security system would be under significant financial strain, potentially jeopardizing its ability to make payments to future retirees.

The importance of understanding these changes is heightened for those nearing retirement age. As reiterated, those born in 1960 or later will need to wait until they are 67 years old to receive full Social Security benefits. Opting to claim benefits before reaching that age comes at a cost. Monthly payments are permanently reduced for those who decide to start collecting benefits earlier. For example, if benefits are claimed at age 62—the earliest possible age—individuals can expect a reduction in their monthly payments by about 30 percent for the rest of their lives.

The timing of when to begin collecting Social Security benefits should be based on a mix of personal and financial considerations. For people in good health with a secure financial foundation, delaying benefits might be the more sensible option. Postponing benefits allows retirees to receive larger monthly payments for the rest of their lives. On the other hand, individuals who are dealing with medical issues or who have a shorter life expectancy may find it more beneficial to begin collecting earlier. This flexibility allows retirees to tailor their decisions based on their specific circumstances.

One of the most effective ways for individuals to navigate these changes is by staying informed and regularly reviewing their Social Security statements. These documents provide a detailed record of earnings and an estimate of future benefits, which can help in making more informed decisions. Tools like the SSA Retirement Estimator also allow users to simulate different retirement scenarios by entering different retirement ages. This helps in visualizing the financial impact of various decisions and planning accordingly.

“The increase in the FRA responds to structural needs of the system, as Americans are living longer, so retirees are collecting benefits for more years than before, and without these adjustments, the Social Security system would face severe financial pressure that would compromise future payments,” the article noted, summarizing the key rationale behind the gradual increase in the retirement age.

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to deciding the optimal time to claim benefits. It requires a careful balance of health, finances, and life expectancy. Deciding when to claim Social Security benefits depends on personal and financial factors. If you are in good health and have a stable financial situation, it is best not to anticipate claiming benefits. While in a case with a shorter life expectancy, it may be advisable to anticipate the collection of monthly payments.

This guidance underscores the need for personalized retirement planning rather than relying on broad assumptions. The consequences of claiming too early or too late can be substantial, and every year of delay past age 62 results in increased monthly benefits—until the age of 70. Beyond that, there is no additional advantage to waiting.

Another crucial point made is about the value of the SSA tools: “It is also advisable to regularly review the Social Security statement to track income and estimated benefits. Tools such as the SSA Retirement Estimator can be used to help get an idea of how much would be received at different ages.” These resources empower individuals to take control of their retirement planning and make educated decisions that align with their long-term goals.

Ultimately, the final phase of the Social Security retirement age reform is not merely a bureaucratic update but a necessary adjustment to meet today’s economic and demographic realities. For those approaching retirement, understanding the impact of this change and using available tools to plan accordingly is critical. Retirees who take the time to educate themselves and make informed choices will be in a much better position to ensure financial stability in their later years.

The overarching lesson from these reforms is the importance of proactive planning. Whether it’s delaying retirement to maximize monthly benefits or making early claims due to personal health conditions, the decisions individuals make today will shape their financial well-being for years to come. The shift in FRA from 66 to 67 may seem small, but its impact is far-reaching. Being aware of it and understanding its consequences is the first step toward a more secure retirement.

As the Social Security system adapts to the evolving needs of the population, staying informed and making strategic decisions will be essential. The final phase of the 1983 reform serves as a reminder that financial sustainability requires forward-thinking policies—and individuals who are prepared to make the most of them.

Sanjyot Dunung Enters Illinois Congressional Race to Reclaim the American Dream with Pragmatic Leadership

Ajay GhoshProfile, USA 0

Sanjyot Dunung, a Des Plaines-based entrepreneur, civic leader, and mother of three sons—including one serving in the military—has launched her campaign for Congress in Illinois’s 8th District. A Democrat and first-time candidate, Dunung is positioning herself as a commonsense alternative to career politicians, bringing with her decades of experience in business, education, and global policy. Her campaign is centered on restoring the American Dream through practical reforms, economic innovation, and deeply rooted community values.

“I’m a small business owner and proud mother of three sons, including one in the military,” Dunung announced in her campaign video. “In a time of real chaos and frustration with the status quo, I am the change candidate stepping up to fight for the American Dream and put people over politics.”

Born in India and immigrated to the US at age 6, raised in Des Plaines, Illinois, Dunung’s personal story is tightly woven into the community she now seeks to represent. Her family initially lived with friends until they could afford their own apartment, and her parents’ tireless work ethic inspired her own sense of responsibility. By age nine, she was babysitting; by ten, she had turned that into a weekend childcare business. “I was born in India, but I was made in America,” she stated. “This community gave me a chance.”

sanjyot 2Her work ethic carried into her college years at Northwestern University, where she juggled studies with a daily paper route. As an adult, she balanced the demands of single motherhood, running a small business, and caring for her ailing parents. These life experiences have given her firsthand insight into the everyday struggles facing working families. “My life was Made in America. This campaign was Made in America. It could not have happened anywhere else,” she declared. “Now, I’m committed to making sure that the same American Dream is alive and well now, and for generations to come.”

Dunung is the founder and CEO of Atma Global, an EdTech company that creates learning solutions for businesses and public institutions. She has authored 17 books, including textbooks on international business and a young adult novel titled “Maddie & Sayara.” Her career has been defined by building—companies, jobs, ideas—and by solving real-world problems with creativity and collaboration.

“I’m running to protect Social Security and Medicare for the next generation, honor our commitment to military families and veterans, ensure healthcare is affordable and accessible, fight for reproductive freedoms, invest in educational opportunities from universal Pre-K to vocational training, harness the American entrepreneurial spirit, and make homeownership and retirement achievable, not aspirational,” she said.

Her campaign reflects her deep concerns of what she sees as ineffective governance. “This administration promised to fix the economy, but instead, it’s breaking promises and tearing down opportunities that make the American Dream possible,” she emphasized. For Dunung, this campaign isn’t just about policy—it’s about practicality. She wants the government to function more efficiently and dynamically for 21st-century needs without cutting the essential programs families rely on.

She brings a wide array of experience to her candidacy. Dunung serves on the Board of Directors of the National Small Business Association, the Truman Center for National Policy, and the American Leadership Project. She was also a member of President Joe Biden’s Foreign Policy Working Group focused on international trade, where she worked to strengthen U.S. small business exports and expand fair trade relationships.

Dunung’s economic views are grounded in her business acumen and policy experience. She has been critical of past and current administrations for their approaches to trade and manufacturing. “The Trump administration asked the right questions—how do we make trade fairer and how do we revitalize manufacturing—but their solutions were all wrong,” she said. “We don’t need to crash the economy in order to fix it. We don’t need to just arbitrarily levy tariffs and hostile policies on countries that are our friends and allies.”

She also took issue with what she sees as the current administration’s abandonment of strategic industrial policies, citing the CHIPS Act under Biden as an important but neglected investment. “You can’t just say you want manufacturing; you have to invest in both learning—from K through 12 to vocational training—and help businesses of all sizes to be able to do that,” she explained.

Dunung is especially focused on workforce development. She wants to ensure that as manufacturing evolves, Americans are equipped to meet new demands. “What might have taken 20 people once to do a manufacturing process now may take five, but those five need to be highly skilled at an AI-driven manufacturing process,” she said. “We need to rethink the training and education to make sure that we give everybody a fair chance at good-paying jobs for the future.”

Her views on immigration also align with her broader economic vision. “We have a declining birth rate. It’s 1.6, and we need to replenish at 2.2,” she said. “We need the immigration system to be fair, transparent, and legal. But our secret sauce as a country is immigrants. We bring work ethic, know-how, and South Asian immigrants fuel technology. We need to champion them.”

As part of her early campaign momentum, Dunung has earned notable endorsements and media recognition. She was recently endorsed by ASPIRE PAC, the political arm of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. “Sanjyot Dunung is committed to building a future that is more affordable, safer, and healthier for all Americans,” said ASPIRE PAC Chair Rep. Marilyn Strickland. “She understands the issues that matter to our communities—from lowering costs to protecting our democracy—and is focused on commonsense solutions that will help working families get ahead.”

Dunung responded, “As a proud Asian American, I am honored to receive ASPIRE PAC’s endorsement. My experiences as an Indian-born, American-made small business owner, single mom, and civic leader inform everything I do.”

She has also been highlighted by Roll Call, which described her as “the candidate for commonsense change across parties,” a recognition she says validates her ability to win a five-way race in a district she knows intimately. Additionally, she was featured in the Northwestern University newspaper as a local alumna running for office, underscoring her strong educational and community ties.

Dunung joins a growing list of candidates competing for the seat soon to be vacated by Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who is running for the U.S. Senate. Other Democratic candidates include Cook County Commissioner Kevin Morrison, Hanover Park Trustee Yasmeen Bankole, and brand executive Christ Kallas. Business owner Mark Rice, a Republican, has also filed to run.

Despite the crowded field, Dunung believes her unique blend of business, policy, and lived experience makes her stand out. “I’m not beholden to special interests. I’m really about being focused on results,” she said. “Everybody talks about needing change, but they want responsible, methodical change. We can improve how the government works. We can get efficiencies. We can get rid of waste. But the way to do it is not with a chainsaw and not overnight by crashing agencies.”

She emphasizes the importance of community-based leadership. “I grew up in this community. I graduated from high school, went to Northwestern. During the last 10 years, I’ve been taking care of my aging parents,” she said. “I’ve walked the talk and I’ve lived the experience that for many people is their daily life.”

Dunung also recognizes the significance of representation in government. “We only have six South Asians in Congress, and only one is a woman. We need to do better. And we can only do better together as a community,” she said. “People from the South Asian community need to get involved to understand how to support folks who align with their views and their values.”

With the Democratic primary set for March 17, 2026, and the general election scheduled for November 3, 2026, Dunung is campaigning hard across the district, which includes areas of Cook, DuPage, and Kane Counties, as well as cities like St. Charles and Geneva. The district also includes St.  Charles, South Barrington Schaumburg,  and Des Plaines, among others. As she connects with voters on the campaign trail, her message remains clear and consistent: responsible government, inclusive opportunity, and long-term investment in people. “We need to lean on the things that have always made America great: freedom, opportunity…and each other,” she said. “By thinking anew and not being afraid to listen and work with anyone, regardless of party, we can get it done for America.”

Dunung’s candidacy is not just a campaign—it’s a story of determination, resilience, and community-driven leadership. For voters in Illinois’s 8th District, she offers a vision rooted in reality and guided by purpose.

To know more about Sanjyot Dunung and support her camdidacy, please visit:
www.SanjyotForCongress.com. Support: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/sml.rol

Trump’s Sweeping Agenda Bill Clears Initial Senate Hurdle Amid GOP Fractures

Staff ReporterUSA 0

A sweeping legislative package reflecting former President Donald Trump’s policy vision narrowly advanced in the Senate, overcoming internal Republican dissent and late-night wrangling. Despite opposition from key GOP senators over Medicaid cuts and debt concerns, the bill gained enough support to move forward, setting the stage for intense debate and a possible July 4 final vote.

In a dramatic turn of events on Capitol Hill, Senate Republicans narrowly pushed forward a massive legislative package championed by former President Donald Trump, despite public resistance from members within their own ranks. The 1,000-page bill — a centerpiece of Trump’s revived domestic agenda — cleared its first procedural vote late Saturday, overcoming internal turbulence and a tense standoff that tested GOP unity.

Two Republican senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, broke ranks and opposed the measure. Paul voiced sharp objections to the bill’s proposed $5 trillion debt ceiling hike, while Tillis cited a projected $38.9 billion cut to Medicaid funds in his home state, warning of devastating consequences for hospitals and rural communities.

The measure, which includes $160 billion for border security, $150 billion in defense spending, and sweeping tax reforms, teetered on the edge of collapse as GOP leaders scrambled to secure votes. The drama unfolded in real time on the Senate floor, where Senate Minority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), flanked by top Republicans, anxiously awaited key votes from skeptical colleagues.

Senators Mike Lee, Rick Scott, and Cynthia Lummis eventually cast their votes in favor after closed-door negotiations, with Senator Ron Johnson switching from “no” to “yes” under mounting pressure. Their support came after Vice President J.D. Vance and party leaders engaged in last-minute talks behind closed doors, culminating in a late-night walk to the chamber that clinched the advancement.

One of the most contentious points came earlier in the week when the Senate parliamentarian struck down a key Medicaid tax provision for violating the Byrd Rule. Republican leaders hastily rewrote the section to comply with Senate rules. Another flashpoint emerged just hours before the vote, when freshman Senator Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) threatened to oppose the bill over a clause requiring the sale of public lands. Party leaders diffused the crisis by promising him a vote on an amendment to remove the language.

Despite these efforts, criticism from both sides of the aisle remains fierce. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) lambasted Republicans for dropping a nearly 1,000-page substitute amendment late Friday, leaving senators little time for review. He accused the GOP of hiding the bill’s true fiscal impact, stating, “They’re afraid to show how badly this will increase the deficit.”

Schumer cited a preliminary Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate indicating the legislation would slash Medicaid by $930 billion, a far deeper cut than the House-passed version. “It’s worse on health care, worse on SNAP, worse on the deficit,” he declared, vowing resistance.

Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine), often a pivotal swing vote, offered tentative support for moving the bill forward but made clear she’s not yet on board for final passage. “There are positive changes, but I still want to see further revisions,” she told reporters, adding that she plans to propose several amendments.

Outside the chamber, the proposal also drew backlash from high-profile figures like Elon Musk, who denounced the bill as a backward-looking handout. “It’s full of giveaways to fossil fuel industries and will kill millions of jobs,” Musk posted on X, formerly Twitter.

In a procedural twist, Schumer warned that if the bill proceeded, he would invoke a time-consuming tactic to have the entire bill read aloud on the Senate floor — a move that could delay debate for up to 12 hours and test the stamina of both clerks and lawmakers ahead of a lengthy series of amendment votes, colloquially known as vote-a-rama.

With a July 4 deadline set by President Trump for final passage, the legislation now heads into what promises to be a grueling final stretch. While Thune celebrated the initial advancement as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity,” deep divisions within the GOP and fierce Democratic resistance signal that the road ahead will be anything but smooth.

Schumer Plans Procedural Block to Delay GOP’s Megabill Passage

Staff ReporterUSA, Politics 0

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York has informed fellow Democrats that he intends to enforce a full reading of the 1,000-page Republican megabill on the Senate floor as a procedural counter to Republican efforts. This strategy, to be enacted after the Republicans vote to proceed with the legislation, is expected to consume roughly 12 hours and potentially delay President Trump’s legislative timeline by at least half a day.

According to a Democratic insider with knowledge of the internal floor strategy, Schumer has instructed members of his caucus to be ready for the lengthy procedural maneuver. His objective is to compel Senate clerks to read aloud the entirety of the bill, a rarely used Senate tactic that can significantly slow down legislative action. The reading would likely stretch through Saturday night and into early Sunday morning, disrupting Senate Republicans’ timeline and forcing staff and senators to endure a prolonged overnight session.

The Senate’s Republican leadership had been bracing for this move, anticipating Schumer might use it as a form of protest. Schumer’s action aligns with broader Democratic resistance to the Republican-led bill, which encompasses sweeping tax cuts and government spending initiatives. The bill is a key component of President Trump’s agenda, and Senate Republicans have been scrambling to pass it before the July 4 deadline set by the president himself.

Originally, GOP leaders had planned to hold a procedural vote on Saturday afternoon to move the bill forward. That vote was to be followed by as many as 20 hours of formal debate. After debate time expired, the Senate would begin a “vote-a-rama” — a marathon session in which senators can offer an unlimited number of amendments, each requiring a vote.

However, Schumer’s procedural move has now shifted that anticipated timeline. With the full reading of the bill expected to last approximately 12 hours, the vote-a-rama is likely to begin much later than planned, potentially in the early hours of Sunday or even later.

There is also uncertainty about whether the Republicans will push clerks to begin reading the bill immediately and continue late into the night, or allow for some pause to give Senate staff time to rest. That decision could affect not only the comfort of Senate staffers but also the pace at which Republicans can push the bill through the chamber.

At the core of this dramatic Senate standoff is President Trump’s aggressive timeline. The administration and GOP leaders want the bill passed quickly to secure a legislative victory before the Independence Day holiday. Schumer’s procedural tactic, while not capable of stopping the bill outright, is meant to spotlight Democratic concerns about the content of the legislation and the rushed manner in which Republicans are pushing it forward.

While Schumer’s strategy is creating logistical hurdles for Republicans, it is not the only obstacle in their path. The vote margin is razor-thin, and GOP leaders are confronting internal dissent within their own ranks. The Senate Republican majority is slim, and they can only afford to lose three votes on any given measure if all Democrats are opposed.

Currently, three Republican senators — Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina — have indicated that they will vote “no” on advancing the bill. Their opposition adds to the suspense surrounding whether the legislation will ultimately move forward.

Senator Schumer’s procedural move is not without precedent. While rarely used, forcing the full reading of a bill is a legitimate tool available to any senator and can be used to slow down the legislative process, especially when a party is seeking more time for scrutiny or public awareness. In this case, the Democrats argue that the Republican bill is being rushed through without adequate discussion or consideration.

The size and scope of the bill — a sprawling legislative package that touches on both tax policy and government spending — make it particularly consequential. Democrats contend that such a large and impactful bill deserves a more deliberate and transparent legislative process. By compelling a reading of every line, Schumer is emphasizing his party’s position that the bill merits far more debate than it has received.

A source close to Democratic leadership summed up the mood within the caucus, saying that the goal is “to make it absolutely clear to the American people that this bill is being rammed through without proper vetting.” The source added that Schumer’s tactic was meant to “draw attention to the sheer size and recklessness of the legislation.”

Republicans, meanwhile, have expressed frustration with the delay. They view Schumer’s maneuver as a political stunt designed to obstruct rather than contribute to the process. However, they are aware that this is one of the few procedural levers Democrats can still pull in a chamber where they lack the majority.

For GOP leaders, the clock is now a significant factor. With the July 4 deadline looming and resistance within their own party, any delay — even one lasting just 12 hours — increases the pressure on their legislative strategy. The timing of the vote-a-rama, already a grueling process under normal conditions, is now more unpredictable than ever.

Whether Republicans will respond to Schumer’s tactic by immediately pushing through the reading overnight or pausing to regroup remains unclear. Either approach carries risks. An overnight reading could strain staff and senators alike, while a pause might give Democrats more time to mobilize public opposition or sway wavering Republicans.

Ultimately, Schumer’s move is a high-profile signal of Democratic dissatisfaction with both the substance and the speed of the Republican bill. While it may not be enough to kill the legislation, it underscores the increasingly acrimonious environment in the Senate as both parties clash over priorities and procedures.

In the coming hours, all eyes will be on the Senate floor — not just to see if the clerks begin their long reading, but also to gauge whether the Republican majority can hold together. With just three Republican senators needed to block the bill, and three already publicly opposed, the outcome remains on a knife’s edge.

As one Democratic source put it, “This is about more than just reading a bill. It’s about standing up for transparency, accountability, and the rights of the minority party.”

NAVA Honors Community Leaders at 18th Annual Celebration in Flushing

Staff ReporterCommunity, USA 0

The New American Voters Association (NAVA) hosted its 18th Annual Dinner Dance and Award Ceremony on June 19, 2025, at Flushing Marina. Organized by NAVA’s Founder and President Dr. Dilip Nath, the evening was a vibrant celebration of civic engagement, public service, and cultural unity. This year’s event also commemorated Juneteenth and included a performance by “Joy of Dance,” blending festivity with the recognition of significant contributions to the community.

A primary focus of the event was to honor individuals who have made noteworthy commitments to public service. These honorees were presented with awards in recognition of their dedication and efforts to uplift society. The evening featured speeches by several prominent elected officials who came to show their support and appreciation for NAVA’s mission and the honorees.

Among those delivering remarks were New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, Queens Borough President Donovan Richards, Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz, and New York State Senators John Liu and Leroy Comrie. Additionally, representatives from the offices of U.S. Senator Charles Schumer and Governor Kathy Hochul were also present, reflecting the event’s broad political engagement.

Dr. Hari Shukla, Chairman of NAVA, received a particularly significant honor during the ceremony. United States Senator Charles Schumer presented him with a Proclamation that highlighted Dr. Shukla’s extraordinary contributions to medical science and child health. The document acknowledged that Dr. Shukla was the first in the United States to use surfactant treatment in preterm infants. It also pointed out his groundbreaking development of a formula for umbilical catheterization, which has become a standard in pediatric care globally. As noted in the Proclamation, “Dr. Shukla’s formula for umbilical catheter is used in 400 million children throughout the world.”

This recognition placed a spotlight on the vital intersection of scientific innovation and public service, emphasizing NAVA’s commitment to celebrating immigrant success stories and the far-reaching impact of such achievements.

The audience included more than two hundred attendees, a mix of community members, NAVA supporters, and civic leaders, all gathered to acknowledge the role that immigrant communities play in shaping the broader narrative of American progress. The high attendance further demonstrated the community’s ongoing support for NAVA’s work and its broader mission of civic engagement and voter participation among new Americans.

Dr. Dilip Nath, who spearheaded the event, has been a consistent advocate for immigrant rights and civic empowerment. Through NAVA, he has worked for nearly two decades to encourage political involvement among new citizens and to create a platform where their voices are recognized. The annual dinner dance serves as a highlight of this ongoing mission, bringing together public servants and constituents in a celebratory setting that also promotes civic responsibility.

The presence of key city and state officials reinforced the importance of this initiative. “Events like these are vital,” said NYC Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, “because they help unite our diverse communities while recognizing those who are building bridges across neighborhoods and cultures.” Williams, known for his advocacy work and progressive stances, praised NAVA’s efforts to make the electoral process more accessible to immigrant populations.

Queens Borough President Donovan Richards echoed these sentiments, stating, “Organizations like NAVA play a crucial role in empowering communities that are too often underrepresented. We need to continue supporting platforms that amplify these voices.”

Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine spoke to the evolving landscape of New York City’s demographic makeup and how organizations such as NAVA contribute to civic inclusivity. “The work being done here is about making democracy stronger,” he said, “by ensuring that every resident, regardless of where they come from, feels invested in the future of this city.”

Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz commended NAVA for recognizing individuals who not only serve the public but also inspire future generations. “Tonight’s honorees have dedicated their lives to service, and that deserves our deepest appreciation,” she said.

Meanwhile, New York State Senator John Liu, himself a trailblazer as the first Asian American to hold citywide office in New York, emphasized the importance of acknowledging community leadership. “When we lift up stories like those of Dr. Shukla,” Liu remarked, “we send a powerful message about the contributions immigrants make every day to our society.”

The evening’s recognition of Dr. Hari Shukla stood out as a symbolic reminder of how medical innovation and immigrant excellence go hand in hand. Senator Charles Schumer’s Proclamation stated, “Dr. Shukla is the pioneer in the United States of using Surfactant in preterm infants,” underscoring his trailblazing role in neonatal care. The citation further noted the global reach of his work: “Dr. Shukla’s formula for umbilical catheter is used in 400 million children throughout the world.”

This prestigious recognition from one of the highest-ranking U.S. lawmakers exemplified the spirit of the event: honoring those who, through their expertise and commitment, have impacted millions of lives while also representing the best of American ideals.

NAVA’s decision to align this year’s dinner with Juneteenth added an extra layer of significance. Juneteenth, which marks the emancipation of enslaved African Americans in the United States, served as a fitting backdrop for a night celebrating freedom, equality, and progress. The “Joy of Dance” performance energized the room and served as a cultural bridge connecting the historical legacy of Juneteenth with the modern journey of immigrants becoming fully active participants in American civic life.

The celebratory tone of the evening did not overshadow its broader message. Rather, the festivity underscored a sense of achievement while also calling attention to the work that remains in ensuring inclusivity in public life. Dr. Dilip Nath reminded attendees of NAVA’s enduring mission, which is not just about voter registration, but about nurturing leadership, building trust in institutions, and encouraging lifelong civic involvement among new Americans.

As the evening came to a close, the atmosphere remained vibrant and hopeful, fueled by a sense of shared purpose and mutual recognition. More than just a ceremonial gathering, the 18th Annual Dinner Dance served as a vivid reminder of the positive influence that immigrants have across every sector of society — from public service and political leadership to groundbreaking advancements in science and medicine.

With over two hundred people in attendance, the 2025 edition of NAVA’s annual event was more than a celebration — it was a reaffirmation of community, service, and the essential role that immigrant voices continue to play in shaping the American experience.

Millions Denied Boarding Each Year Due to Overbooked Flights, Study Reveals

Staff ReporterUSA, Travel 0

An eye-opening report has unveiled that a staggering number of air passengers are being denied boarding despite holding a valid boarding pass and passport. This widespread issue stems from the common airline practice of overbooking, which has left millions of travelers stranded.

According to data released by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), approximately 6.6 million passengers each year are turned away from boarding flights after being ‘bumped’ due to overbooked planes. This occurs when airlines sell more tickets than there are available seats, anticipating that a portion of passengers won’t show up. However, when more travelers turn up than expected, airlines are forced to deny boarding to some, creating delays and frustration among affected passengers, as reported by The Liverpool Echo.

A recent study conducted by GoCompare, utilizing CAA data and supplemental survey insights, estimates that over the past decade, roughly 20.9 million passengers have experienced consequences due to overbooking. The study found that one-third of those impacted were outright denied the chance to board their flights, resulting in an annual average of 6.6 million travelers unable to fly despite being ticketed.

Legally, airlines are required to assist those who are denied boarding by offering rebooking options, compensation, and additional support. Despite these requirements, the study reveals that assistance is not always guaranteed. While the majority—84 percent—of bumped passengers were eventually placed on alternative flights, this still leaves about one million people annually who never received a replacement flight, compounding their travel disruption.

For those who missed their flights, the aftermath was not just about delays. Nearly two-thirds reported financial losses resulting from being denied boarding. This includes missed accommodations, transport connections, or additional costs incurred from having to make new travel arrangements. Alarmingly, less than half of these affected passengers pursued claims through their travel insurance, even though some costs could potentially be recovered.

These findings have prompted renewed calls for travelers to be fully aware of their rights and options when it comes to overbooking-related issues. Rhys Jones, a travel insurance expert at Go.Compare, strongly advised passengers to take action when facing this stressful scenario.

“Flight overbooking happens more than we’d like to think, and it can make for an extremely stressful start to any trip for the passengers affected,” Jones warned. He emphasized the importance of confirming the reason for denial. “If it happens to you, and you’re not allowed to board a plane, the first thing you should do is confirm with the airline that you were denied boarding because of overbooking. Get this in writing if possible.”

Jones also encouraged travelers to immediately engage with the airline to understand how they will be supported. “Next, you’ll want to discuss what your airline intends to do to get your trip back on course, how they plan to assist you and what compensation they’re offering. They should try to book you onto another flight when possible,” he added.

In addition to communication, documentation is crucial. “Remember to keep all relevant documents like boarding passes, communications from your airline and receipts for accommodation or meal costs,” Jones advised. “Your airline should compensate these expenses. Know that you can complain to your airline if necessary, and even, if it isn’t being resolved, take your complaint to the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) or an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) scheme.”

While many might assume that travel insurance covers such situations, Jones clarified that this isn’t always the case. “While travel insurance likely won’t cover you for overbooking, you should be able to claim compensation from your airline for certain costs incurred as a result, like if you missed your connection or have to cancel part of your trip.”

That said, he pointed out that some insurance plans include optional travel disruption cover. “And, some insurance policies do offer optional travel disruption cover, which can protect you if your airline fails to provide a suitable alternative flight. So it’s worth checking if your provider offers this, and the details of what’s included,” he noted.

The findings of the study underscore just how common the issue has become and highlight the importance of both airline accountability and passenger preparedness. While the practice of overbooking may make economic sense for carriers trying to maximize capacity, it has clear and often serious repercussions for travelers who expect a seamless journey.

The combination of the legal obligations imposed on airlines and the recourse options available to passengers suggests that being well-informed is one of the most powerful tools a traveler can have. As the data shows, millions have already faced the fallout from overbooking, and many more could be affected in the future unless there’s better transparency and a stronger push for consumer awareness.

The study ultimately calls attention to a practice that many may not even realize is occurring until they find themselves on the wrong side of the boarding gate. With proper awareness and understanding of one’s rights, passengers can mitigate the stress and potential financial burden of being denied boarding.

By knowing what steps to take—starting from getting written confirmation to preserving receipts and contacting the appropriate resolution bodies—travelers can increase their chances of receiving appropriate compensation and support.

In a time when air travel has resumed high volumes post-pandemic, the message is clear: vigilance and knowledge are essential. As Rhys Jones concluded, being prepared can make a world of difference if your flight plans suddenly go awry.

Trump Wins 2024 Election with Broader Coalition and First Popular Vote Victory

Staff ReporterUSA 0

In his third bid for the presidency, Donald Trump clinched a decisive victory over Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. Not only did he secure 312 Electoral College votes, but for the first time, he also won the national popular vote, defeating Harris by 1.5 percentage points. His success was fueled by a more diverse voter coalition compared to his earlier campaigns, as outlined in a new Pew Research Center study examining the 2024 electorate.

Among Latino voters, Trump made significant inroads, narrowing the gap considerably. While Joe Biden had defeated him among Hispanics by a wide margin in 2020 (61% to 36%), the 2024 figures were much closer, with Harris winning 51% and Trump securing 48%. This nearly even split suggests Trump made notable progress with this key demographic.

Black voter support for Trump also increased substantially. In 2020, he received just 8% of the Black vote. By 2024, that figure had climbed to 15%. Although Harris maintained majority support among Black Americans, the shift toward Trump signals an important change in voting behavior.

Asian American voters showed similar trends. While Harris earned the support of 57% of Asian voters, Trump won 40%. In comparison, Biden had captured 70% of the Asian vote in 2020, with Trump garnering only 30%. The narrowed margin in 2024 indicates Trump’s growing appeal among this group as well.

According to Pew, these shifts were mainly due to changes in voter turnout between 2020 and 2024 rather than widespread switching of party loyalty. Most voters stuck with the party they supported in the previous election. However, Trump gained from increased turnout among his 2020 supporters and an edge among new voters who did not participate in the 2020 election. This new voter group was significantly more diverse than those who voted in both years.

Despite Trump’s improved performance among various groups, many of the entrenched voting patterns that have characterized American politics for decades persisted. One of the most prominent was the divide in educational attainment. Trump continued to dominate among voters without a four-year college degree, widening his advantage to 14 percentage points (56% to 42%), double the margin he achieved in 2016. In contrast, Harris outperformed Trump among college-educated voters, winning 57% to his 41%. However, her lead was smaller than Biden’s margin in 2020.

The urban-rural divide also deepened. Trump captured rural voters by a massive 40-point margin, with 69% of rural residents backing him compared to just 29% for Harris. Meanwhile, voters in urban areas largely supported Harris, with 65% favoring her and 33% choosing Trump.

Religion continued to influence voter behavior. Pew found that nearly two-thirds of Americans who attend religious services at least monthly (64%) voted for Trump. In contrast, Harris was favored by 56% of those who attend services less frequently, while 43% of that group chose Trump.

Voter retention and turnout differences also played a critical role in Trump’s win. A larger portion of Trump’s 2020 supporters (89%) turned out again in 2024, compared to 85% of Biden’s 2020 voters. Additionally, among those who didn’t vote in 2020 but did in 2024, 54% supported Trump, while 42% voted for Harris.

Between the two elections, voter loyalty held steady for most. “About 85% of those who backed Trump in 2020 did so again in 2024,” Pew reported. Only 11% of his previous supporters did not vote in 2024, and 4% switched sides or supported another candidate. Harris retained the backing of 79% of Biden’s 2020 voters, but a slightly higher 15% of them didn’t vote, and 6% either chose Trump or someone else.

New and returning voters – those who had been eligible in 2020 but didn’t vote – also leaned toward Trump when they participated in 2024. Among this group, which includes those who were too young to vote in 2020, 14% voted for Trump and 12% for Harris. This indicates a modest advantage for Trump among first-time or returning voters.

Overall, voting behavior between 2020 and 2024 showed both consistency and change. About 75% of eligible adults repeated their 2020 behavior – either voting for the same party or sitting out both elections. The remaining quarter changed course by switching party allegiance, voting in 2024 after not voting in 2020, or abstaining in 2024 after voting in the previous election.

Despite the high stakes, Harris might not have gained significantly from a broader turnout. When Pew asked nonvoters how they would have voted, responses were nearly even: 44% said they would have backed Trump, while 40% said Harris. This contrasts with 2020, when nonvoters showed a clear preference for Biden over Trump (46% to 35%).

This suggests that even with full voter participation in 2024, the final result likely wouldn’t have changed much. Pew noted that in 2020, a full turnout would likely have increased Biden’s margin of victory, unlike in 2024 when the nonvoter pool leaned more evenly between both parties. “Democrats have held an edge among nonvoters in prior elections dating back to at least the 1960s,” Pew stated, “though there is some evidence this advantage had declined in recent elections.”

Among naturalized citizens – immigrants who have become U.S. citizens – support was nearly split. Harris won 51% of their votes, while Trump captured 47%. This marked a significant shift from 2020, when Biden had led this group by 21 points (59% to 38%). In the 2024 electorate, naturalized citizens accounted for 9% of all voters.

Trump also gained ground with male voters, especially younger men. Men overall favored Trump by a 12-point margin (55% to 43%), a notable increase from 2020 when the gender divide was narrower. Among men under 50, the race was nearly even in 2024, with 49% supporting Trump and 48% backing Harris. In 2020, this group had favored Biden by 10 points (53% to 43%).

Despite historically high voter engagement in recent elections, many Americans remain disengaged. The 2024 turnout rate stood at 64%, the second-highest since 1960, trailing only the 2020 turnout. Still, about 26% of eligible voters had no record of voting in any of the last three national elections. These nonparticipants were disproportionately younger and less likely to have college degrees than consistent voters.

Another notable development was the growth in early in-person voting. In 2024, 32% of voters cast their ballots in person before Election Day, up from 27% in 2020. Meanwhile, 34% voted in person on Election Day itself.

Pew’s analysis paints a complex picture of the 2024 election: while traditional voting patterns held firm in many areas, Trump’s outreach to more diverse demographics, combined with targeted voter turnout strategies, enabled him to secure a broader coalition and his first-ever win in the national popular vote.

Supreme Court Backs Trump in Narrowing Blocks on Birthright Citizenship Ban

Staff ReporterImmigration, USA 0

In a significant ruling on Friday, June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with President Donald Trump by allowing the administration to limit nationwide judicial orders that had been preventing the enforcement of his controversial policy to end automatic citizenship for U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants and foreign visitors. This decision marks a crucial moment in Trump’s broader efforts to impose more restrictive immigration rules.

The 6-3 decision, with the court’s liberal justices in dissent, now returns the case to the lower courts. These courts are tasked with determining how this ruling should be applied in practice. While the Supreme Court did not directly address whether the birthright citizenship ban itself is constitutional, the judgment nonetheless clears a procedural hurdle for Trump’s policy to potentially advance further.

The Trump administration’s request to the high court did not focus on a definitive ruling about the legality of denying citizenship to children born in the U.S. under these circumstances. Instead, the administration argued that lower courts had overstepped their authority by issuing universal injunctions, which blocked the policy from taking effect across the entire country during ongoing litigation.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, challenged the legitimacy of these broad, nationwide court orders. She argued that such actions go beyond the judicial powers granted by Congress. “Some say that the universal injunction ‘give[s] the Judiciary a powerful tool to check the Executive Branch,’” she wrote. “But federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch; they resolve cases and controversies consistent with the authority Congress has given them. When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.”

This reasoning reflects the court’s growing discomfort with the expansive power lower courts have used in recent years to block major federal policies nationwide. Justices and legal scholars have increasingly scrutinized the use of nationwide injunctions, particularly in cases involving contentious policies from both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal member of the court, issued a strongly worded dissent. Speaking directly from the bench, she expressed profound opposition to the ruling, describing it as a judicial failure with severe consequences. She stated that the decision was a “travesty” and warned that it would “cause chaos for the families of all affected children.”

The court’s ruling was among six released on the final day of its current term, highlighting the importance and urgency of the decisions being made. The ruling stops short of validating Trump’s executive order but does reduce the ability of lower courts to impose sweeping national blocks while the legality of such orders is being debated.

The use of nationwide injunctions has long sparked criticism from both Democratic and Republican leaders. These types of judicial orders, which halt the implementation of policies across the country, are intended to prevent potential harm while lawsuits proceed. However, critics argue they give disproportionate influence to individual judges and undermine the democratic process.

The broader issue underlying this legal battle is whether Trump has the authority to eliminate birthright citizenship for certain groups of U.S.-born children. The executive order signed by Trump on his return to office aims to deny citizenship to those born on American soil if neither parent is a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident.

Trump’s policy is part of a sweeping immigration agenda that seeks to reduce both legal and illegal immigration. His administration has previously moved to ban travelers from over a dozen nations, accelerate deportations—particularly of individuals suspected of gang affiliation from countries like Venezuela—limit refugee admissions, and strip legal protections from over half a million migrants residing in the U.S.

The order to end birthright citizenship sparked immediate legal backlash. Twenty-two states and numerous immigrant advocacy organizations filed lawsuits, arguing that the move conflicts with the U.S. Constitution and previous rulings from the courts.

Central to the argument is the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified after the Civil War. This amendment established citizenship rights for formerly enslaved individuals and stated that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are citizens. This clause was designed to overrule the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, which had denied Black Americans the right to citizenship.

Trump and his supporters contend that the children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visitors are not truly “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States because their parents lack legal status. Based on this interpretation, they believe these children do not qualify for automatic citizenship.

However, this view is strongly opposed by most constitutional experts, legal scholars, and immigration advocates. They argue that Trump’s interpretation would require a dramatic re-reading of the 14th Amendment and goes against long-standing legal precedent. In particular, they point to the Supreme Court’s 1898 ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which upheld that a child born in the United States to immigrant parents—who were not citizens—was nonetheless an American citizen. Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco to parents who were subjects of the Chinese Emperor, yet the court affirmed his citizenship under the 14th Amendment.

This precedent forms a central pillar in the opposition’s legal challenge. Critics argue that excluding certain children born in the U.S. from citizenship sets a dangerous precedent and opens the door to broader exclusions based on ancestry or parentage.

The high court’s latest decision does not determine whether Trump’s executive order will ultimately stand. Instead, it allows the policy to be more easily implemented by lifting the universal injunctions that had previously blocked it across the country. This procedural win makes it harder for opponents to prevent enforcement of the order while they continue their legal fight.

Moving forward, the legal battle over birthright citizenship is likely to return to the lower courts, where judges will weigh constitutional arguments in greater detail. Given the Supreme Court’s reluctance to address the constitutional question directly in this instance, it remains to be seen how and when the justices might eventually rule on the core issue of whether children born on U.S. soil to undocumented parents can be denied citizenship.

For now, Trump and his supporters have scored a procedural victory that may allow the policy to take effect in parts of the country—unless lower courts find other grounds to block it. However, the controversy is far from over, and with lawsuits continuing to unfold across multiple jurisdictions, the future of birthright citizenship in America remains uncertain.

Supreme Court Ruling Alters Presidential Powers and Judicial Oversight Dynamics

Staff ReporterOpinion, USA 0

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on a case tied to birthright citizenship, delivered on Friday, extends its implications well beyond President Donald Trump. This significant decision reshapes the boundaries of presidential power and judicial checks, granting expanded authority not only to Trump but to future occupants of the Oval Office.

The decision’s core impact is the curbing of the judiciary’s ability to impose nationwide blocks on presidential actions. The ruling weakens the longstanding role of lower federal courts in restraining the executive branch. Whether this development is seen as a victory or a threat largely depends on political perspective. Currently, Republicans view it as a success, while Democrats express concern. These reactions will likely reverse should a Democrat hold the presidency in the future.

Importantly, the court did not directly address whether Trump’s proposal to redefine birthright citizenship is constitutional. Trump has long championed the idea of ending automatic citizenship for children born on U.S. soil to non-citizen parents. This effort, which immigration hardliners frame as a fight against “anchor babies,” aims to prevent individuals from gaining citizenship through birth when their parents are in the country unlawfully. Supporters argue it would close a loophole that shields unauthorized immigrants from deportation by virtue of their citizen children.

However, critics assert that Trump’s position violates the Fourteenth Amendment, which declares, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” They argue that even undocumented immigrants fall under U.S. jurisdiction while residing in the country, and thus their children should be granted citizenship.

While the debate over birthright citizenship remains unresolved, lower courts have consistently ruled against the Trump administration on the matter. Those decisions have been appealed, and the issue may return to the Supreme Court in the near future. But Friday’s ruling focused not on birthright citizenship itself, but rather on the authority of district courts to issue what are known as “universal injunctions.”

The court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that district courts can no longer enforce such nationwide injunctions that prevent implementation of federal actions beyond the immediate parties involved in a lawsuit. This majority consisted of the Court’s six conservative justices, three of whom were nominated by Trump during his first term, effectively outvoting the three liberal justices.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, stated, “A universal injunction can be justified only as an exercise of equitable authority, yet Congress has granted federal courts no such power.” She expressed concern that allowing judges to issue such broad blocks could lead to an imbalance of power, warning against what she described as an “imperial judiciary” that could overstep its constitutional limits. In contrast, she cautioned against those who, like Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, might try to limit presidential power by overly empowering the courts.

This decision favors not only the current president but future presidents as well, empowering them to act without immediate fear of blanket judicial halts. Yet it also opens the door to potential legal confusion, where executive orders might be enforced in some states and blocked in others—at least until the Supreme Court provides a definitive ruling.

President Trump, reacting swiftly to the ruling, made a brief appearance in the White House briefing room. He declared the ruling to be “a monumental victory for the constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law.” For Trump and his allies, the decision represents a crucial win in the ongoing clash between the executive branch and the judiciary. Figures like Stephen Miller have frequently condemned judicial decisions that countered Trump-era policies, accusing judges of orchestrating a “judicial coup.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the main dissent, delivering a passionate rebuttal to the majority’s logic. She declared, “No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates,” and added, “Today, the threat is to birthright citizenship. Tomorrow, a different administration may try to seize firearms from law-abiding citizens or prevent people of certain faiths from gathering to worship.” Her dissent emphasized the dangers of granting unchecked power to the executive branch, suggesting that it could undermine rights previously assumed to be protected.

Sotomayor also challenged the Trump administration’s underlying motive in shifting focus to injunctions, arguing it was a diversion due to the administration’s inability to succeed on the core legal issue. She wrote, “Trump had an impossible task in light of the Constitution’s text, history, this Court’s precedents, federal law, and Executive Branch practice.”

Unlike her conservative peers, Sotomayor chose to grapple directly with the constitutionality of altering birthright citizenship. She suggested that the administration’s maneuvering around universal injunctions was an attempt to circumvent the likely defeat of its limited interpretation of citizenship rights.

Interestingly, even among the majority, some expressed concern about the ruling’s practical consequences. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, though aligned with the conservative majority, flagged the complexities of implementing such a fragmented legal framework across the country. He noted that during the period when various legal challenges are playing out, it is problematic to have a “patchwork scheme” where a federal statute or executive order may be enforceable in some states but not in others.

Kavanaugh warned, “There often (perhaps not always, but often) should be a nationally uniform answer on whether a major new federal statute, rule, or executive order can be enforced throughout the United States during the several-year interim period until its legality is finally decided on the merits.” He added, “It is not especially workable or sustainable or desirable to have a patchwork scheme, potentially for several years, in which a major new federal statute or executive action of that kind applies to some people or organizations in certain States or regions, but not to others.”

These concerns underscore the broader implications of the ruling. While it strengthens the hand of the president and limits judicial overreach, it could also introduce significant legal inconsistency and uncertainty throughout the country. As such, it reflects one of the most far-reaching recalibrations of the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches in recent memory.

The birthright citizenship issue remains unresolved and contentious, but this Supreme Court decision is likely to shape presidential authority and legal challenges for years to come. Whether it leads to greater efficiency or increased constitutional friction will depend on how both current and future leaders wield the power this ruling has now affirmed.

House Votes to Deport Noncitizens Convicted of Driving Drunk

Ajay GhoshImmigration, USA 0

The House on Friday passed legislation to deport noncitizens convicted of drunken driving, reported Breitbart.

The legislation, the Jeremy and Angel Seay and Sergeant Brandon Mendoza Protect Our Communities from DUIs Act, was introduced by Rep. Barry Moore, R-Ala., in honor of a couple from his district who were killed by a migrant drunken driver while they were riding a motorcycle.

“Their lives were cut short by the senseless act,” Moore told the Alabama Daily News. “Tragedies like this are not uncommon across this country.”

Republicans overwhelmingly supported the bill, while 160 Democrats opposed the measure.

China Edges Closer to B-2 Rival as U.S. Deploys Stealth Bomber Against Iran

Staff ReporterGlobal, USA 0

In a stunning demonstration of military capability, the United States recently used its stealth B-2 Spirit bomber to target Iran’s most fortified nuclear facility—marking an unprecedented application of air power. While this headline-grabbing move captured global attention, another significant development has been unfolding quietly in the shadows: China appears to be progressing with its own stealth bomber program. Satellite images dated May 14, 2025, obtained by The War Zone, captured a strikingly large, stealthy aircraft with a flying wing design at a covert test site near Malan in China’s Xinjiang region.

The mysterious aircraft, which resembles a drone, is believed to be a high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) platform. Analysts say its appearance outside newly constructed hangars suggests it could be part of a broader technological ecosystem involving China’s next-generation stealth projects such as the H-20 bomber and the J-36 fighter jet. Experts have estimated the aircraft’s wingspan to be roughly 52 meters—or about 170 feet—placing it in the same size category as the U.S. B-2 Spirit.

Though the sighting points to an impressive feat in aviation, questions persist about whether China’s technological leap was entirely indigenous. A shadow from the past resurfaces in this context, involving a man who was once an integral part of America’s stealth program. In 2005, former Northrop engineer Noshir Gowadia was arrested for leaking top-secret U.S. defense information to China and other foreign nations. His betrayal may have sown the seeds for the capabilities now visible in China’s burgeoning stealth aircraft arsenal.

Gowadia, born in Bombay (now Mumbai), joined Northrop in the 1960s. During his time with the company, he played a critical role in the development of the B-2’s revolutionary low-observable propulsion and stealth technology. After leaving Northrop in 1986, Gowadia went on to launch his own consulting firm. However, by 2004, federal investigators were scrutinizing his activities after classified infrared suppression documents were discovered in a furniture shipment addressed to him. The FBI’s findings indicated something far more alarming than a paperwork mishap.

According to Popular Mechanics, Gowadia had made several trips to China between 2003 and 2004, during which he allegedly handed over sensitive details about stealth technology. In return, he received approximately $110,000 over a span of three years. The FBI acted decisively in October 2005, raiding his home in Maui, Hawaii, and seizing 500 pounds of material that included paper documents and electronic storage devices.

“Gowadia had spent two decades at the aerospace and defense contractor Northrop (now Northrop Grumman) where he was instrumental in designing the stealth propulsion system for the B-2 Spirit bomber, one of the most revolutionary military technologies in generations,” the report stated. “He once had top security clearance and taught university classes in advanced aeronautical principles.”

Initially, Gowadia denied any wrongdoing, but eventually he submitted a written confession. “On reflection, what I did was wrong to help the PRC make a cruise missile. What I did was espionage and treason,” he admitted. His acknowledgment of guilt left little ambiguity about the gravity of his actions. In 2010, he was convicted on 14 counts under both the Arms Export Control Act and the Espionage Act. The following year, he was sentenced to 32 years in prison. Today, he remains incarcerated at the supermax federal penitentiary in Florence, Colorado.

Despite the conviction, the case continues to generate controversy. Gowadia’s son, Ashton Gowadia, has steadfastly maintained his father’s innocence. He alleges that vital pieces of evidence were withheld during the trial and that the FBI shaped the entire narrative to ensure a conviction. While these claims persist, the consensus among security experts is that the damage was already irreversible.

The intelligence compromised by Gowadia seems to have accelerated China’s access to advanced stealth capabilities. Observers now see a direct link between his betrayal and the technological maturity reflected in China’s recent aviation developments. The newly spotted aircraft near Malan bears key design similarities to the B-2 Spirit, particularly in its flying wing structure and its apparent ability to reduce radar cross-section, both hallmarks of American stealth design.

Though full operational details about the Chinese craft remain classified or speculative, its dimensions and structure hint at more than just a surveillance role. The aircraft could potentially be a manned bomber, a large autonomous drone, or a flexible platform capable of carrying advanced payloads for both reconnaissance and strike missions. With projects like the H-20 long-range stealth bomber reportedly in development for over a decade, the emergence of this HALE-like aircraft reinforces speculation that China is close to unveiling its own version of the B-2.

The geopolitical implications of this development are profound. As the U.S. continues to maintain a technological edge with proven platforms like the B-2, the emergence of a near-peer Chinese equivalent represents a shift in the balance of strategic air power. The B-2 remains the only operational stealth bomber in the world with long-range strike capabilities and the ability to penetrate the most heavily defended airspaces. However, if China succeeds in fielding a similar craft, it could significantly alter the equation of deterrence and response in any future conflict scenario.

China has remained tight-lipped about the aircraft spotted near Malan. No official statements have been released, nor have any details been published in state-controlled media. Nonetheless, defense analysts agree that this sighting adds weight to growing concerns about China’s rapid advancements in military aerospace technology. These developments are especially notable given the country’s past reliance on reverse-engineering foreign systems. With help from figures like Gowadia, China’s journey to achieving true stealth capabilities may have gained crucial momentum.

In retrospect, the full scope of Gowadia’s betrayal goes beyond the man himself. It exposed vulnerabilities in America’s defense industrial security and provided adversarial powers with a shortcut to catching up. The fallout from his actions is now playing out in satellite images, in foreign hangars, and perhaps soon in global airspace.

As China edges closer to deploying a stealth bomber that could stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the B-2, the world is witnessing a new era of aerial warfare defined not just by innovation, but also by the lingering consequences of espionage.

US Strikes on Iran’s Nuclear Sites Caused Limited Damage, Say Intelligence Assessments

Staff ReporterGlobal, USA 0

Recent United States military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities did not achieve their goal of fully dismantling the country’s nuclear program, according to a preliminary intelligence evaluation. The report, described by seven individuals familiar with its findings, indicates that while damage was done, the effect of the strikes is estimated to have delayed Iran’s progress by only a few months.

The evaluation was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which serves as the Pentagon’s intelligence branch. It relied on battle damage assessments carried out by US Central Command following the strikes. According to one source, the analysis remains ongoing and may evolve as more intelligence is gathered. However, the early conclusions contradict assertions made by President Donald Trump and his administration regarding the effectiveness of the attacks.

President Trump has claimed that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment infrastructure. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth echoed this sentiment, saying, “Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been obliterated.” Yet, two individuals briefed on the assessment stated that Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of them added that the centrifuges “are largely intact.” Another source mentioned that the enriched uranium may have been removed from the targeted sites before the strikes occurred.

“So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops,” said one of the sources.

Despite acknowledging the existence of the assessment, the White House firmly disagreed with its conclusions. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN, “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”

While attending the NATO summit in the Netherlands, Trump dismissed CNN’s report in a Truth Social post, calling the operation “one of the most successful military strikes in history,” and claiming, “The nuclear sites in Iran are completely destroyed!”

Hegseth, also at the summit, clarified on Wednesday that the assessment was “a top secret report; it was preliminary; it was low confidence.” He suggested that the leak was politically motivated and said the FBI was investigating to identify the source of the leak.

The Pentagon continues to describe the strikes as an “overwhelming success.” Nonetheless, sources familiar with the matter emphasized that it is still early for a definitive analysis of the strikes’ effects. Intelligence gathering is ongoing, including within Iran itself.

Leading up to the US action, Israel had already been targeting Iranian nuclear sites. However, Israeli officials indicated they required US-deployed bunker buster bombs to complete the mission. American B-2 bombers dropped over a dozen such bombs on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant and the Natanz Enrichment Complex. Yet, the bombs did not entirely destroy the centrifuges or the enriched uranium, according to the sources. The DIA concluded that damage was largely limited to aboveground facilities, including power infrastructure and buildings used in uranium metal conversion for potential weapons.

The Israeli evaluation also indicated that Fordow suffered less damage than initially anticipated. However, Israeli officials believe the combined strikes from both nations delayed Iran’s nuclear program by two years. They note that this delay assumes Iran can rebuild without interference—something Israel vows to prevent. It’s important to note that Israeli officials had already estimated a two-year delay before the US operation took place.

Hegseth reaffirmed the administration’s stance in a statement to CNN, saying, “Based on everything we have seen — and I’ve seen it all — our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons. Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran; so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the President and the successful mission.”

On Tuesday, Trump reiterated his confidence in the strikes, stating, “I think it’s been completely demolished,” and “Those pilots hit their targets. Those targets were obliterated, and the pilots should be given credit.”

When asked about the potential for Iran to rebuild, Trump responded, “That place is under rock. That place is demolished.”

Despite these confident assertions, Trump acknowledged that current intelligence is “inconclusive” and said more information is expected from Israel. Speaking from the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague, he admitted, “The intelligence was very inconclusive. The intelligence says we don’t know. It could have been very severe.”

While the administration projects confidence, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine adopted a more cautious tone. He stated on Sunday that, given the ongoing nature of the damage assessment, it was “way too early” to determine whether Iran’s nuclear capabilities had been fully neutralized.

Republican Representative Michael McCaul, former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also struck a measured note. When asked by CNN, he declined to support Trump’s statement that Iran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated.” He explained, “I’ve been briefed on this plan in the past, and it was never meant to completely destroy the nuclear facilities, but rather cause significant damage. But it was always known to be a temporary setback.”

Weapons expert Jeffrey Lewis, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, reviewed commercial satellite images of the strike zones. He concurred that Iran’s nuclear program had not been eradicated. “The ceasefire came without either Israel or the United States being able to destroy several key underground nuclear facilities, including near Natanz, Isfahan and Parchin,” Lewis said. He noted that Parchin, a nuclear complex near Tehran, remains capable of helping Iran quickly reestablish its program. “These facilities could serve as the basis for the rapid reconstitution of Iran’s nuclear program.”

Classified briefings scheduled for both the Senate and the House were postponed on Tuesday. Sources said the all-Senate briefing was rescheduled for Thursday, while the House briefing also faced delays, with no immediate explanation or revised date provided.

Representative Pat Ryan, a Democrat from New York, commented on X that “Trump just cancelled a classified House briefing on the Iran strikes with zero explanation. The real reason? He claims he destroyed ‘all nuclear facilities and capability;’ his team knows they can’t back up his bluster and BS.”

The capability of the US’ Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs to effectively destroy Iran’s deeply buried nuclear sites has long been in question, particularly concerning the Fordow and Isfahan facilities. In fact, the US used Tomahawk missiles from a submarine against Isfahan, rather than deploying bunker buster bombs. One source explained this choice by noting that Isfahan’s lower levels are even deeper underground than Fordow’s and likely beyond the bomb’s reach.

Further complicating the picture, US officials believe Iran may possess undisclosed nuclear facilities that were not targeted and remain fully operational, according to two sources familiar with the intelligence.

Zohran Mamdani Secures Democratic Mayoral Nod, Defeats Cuomo in Stunning Primary Upset

Staff ReporterUSA 0

Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani is poised to clinch the Democratic nomination for mayor after former Governor Andrew Cuomo conceded late Tuesday night following the initial round of ranked-choice voting. The early results sent shockwaves through the city’s political landscape as Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic socialist, pulled off an unexpected lead against the much older and more established Cuomo.

Mamdani’s campaign successfully energized younger voters and newcomers to the political process, establishing a robust ground operation that surpassed all competitors. Despite Cuomo’s significant name recognition and his campaign spending more than three times as much as Mamdani’s, the assemblyman surged ahead. With 95% of precincts reporting two hours after polls closed at 9 p.m., Mamdani was the first-choice candidate for 44% of voters, while Cuomo garnered 36%. City Comptroller Brad Lander followed with 11%.

Just after midnight, Mamdani took the stage at his election night celebration on a Long Island City rooftop brewery, where he received a hero’s welcome. “Today, eight months after launching this campaign with the vision of a city that every New Yorker could afford, we have won,” Mamdani declared. “I will be the mayor for every New Yorker, whether you voted for me, for Gov. Cuomo or felt too disillusioned by a long, broken political system to vote at all. I will fight for a city that works for you, that is affordable for you, that is safe for you.”

The ranked-choice system played in Mamdani’s favor, especially due to Lander’s public endorsement of him as a second-choice pick. This alignment meant Lander’s supporters were likely to boost Mamdani in subsequent tabulation rounds. “Together, we are sending Andrew Cuomo back to the suburbs,” Lander said at his own campaign event.

Although Cuomo conceded the primary, he and incumbent Mayor Eric Adams have already petitioned to appear on the general election ballot in November as independent candidates.

According to preliminary data, Mamdani led citywide with 43.5% of more than 990,800 votes cast across the five boroughs. Cuomo’s campaign headquarters at the Carpenters Union building on Manhattan’s west side saw a surprise appearance from the former governor. “I want to applaud the Assemblyman for a really smart and good and impactful campaign. Tonight was his night. He deserved it. He won,” Cuomo stated, accompanied by his daughters and son-in-law. He also shared that he had personally called Mamdani to congratulate him.

Mamdani began primary day with a 5:40 a.m. press conference in Astoria Park before heading to Jackson Heights to meet voters. “We are approaching the dawn of a new era in New York City,” he said that morning. “We are turning the page on the corrupt politics of the past that made this the most expensive city in the United States of America.”

As vote counts trickled in during the evening, Mamdani’s supporters gathered at the brewery to watch the results, while most of his volunteers were at various watch parties organized by allied groups. The mood was jubilant. “I am in a little bit of a state of disbelief,” said Gabbi Zutrau, a social media strategist for the campaign.

“It is such a historic moment for us as Muslims, as South Asians, as immigrants, as New Yorkers,” said Saman Waquad, president of the Muslim Democratic Club of New York. “The way Zohran has brought people together in this campaign has been so incredibly beautiful.”

Janos Marton, a former candidate for Manhattan district attorney who helped canvass for Mamdani, noted the campaign’s ability to energize diverse voter bases. “It was clear that he was bringing new people in — South Asians, Muslims, young people — and that was true on Staten Island, where I live, and I guess it was across the city too,” Marton remarked.

Other candidates trailed significantly behind. Former Comptroller Scott Stringer conceded shortly after polls closed, and City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams received just 4% of the vote. Several others — including Zellnor Myrie, Michael Blake, Whitney Tilson, Jessica Ramos, Paperboy Prince, and Selma Bartholomew — secured less than 1% each.

In other races, incumbent Public Advocate Jumaane Williams defended his seat against Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar. Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine held a substantial lead in the comptroller race over Brooklyn Councilmember Justin Brannan, who conceded later that evening.

The results released Tuesday night reflect only ballots cast in person or those received and scanned by June 20. The Board of Elections will not release the full ranked-choice tabulation until at least July 1. Affidavit ballots and corrected absentee ballots returned by July 14 will also be included in the final tally, with certified results expected thereafter.

Mamdani’s upset victory over Cuomo marked a powerful rebuke of the political establishment. Cuomo had initially entered the race as a frontrunner, capitalizing on his extensive political résumé and asserting his experience as a counter to both the Trump administration and what he portrayed as city mismanagement. Despite not residing in New York City for decades, Cuomo adopted a “Rose Garden” strategy, keeping a low profile while letting his well-funded campaign and outside groups, including the $25 million-backed Fix the City PAC, dominate the media space with anti-Mamdani messaging.

Nevertheless, Mamdani prevailed. Currently serving his third term in the New York State Assembly, he drew support through viral social media content and a ground game driven by 50,000 volunteers who knocked on over a million doors across the five boroughs. His campaign promises included fare-free buses, rent freezes on stabilized units, and municipal grocery stores in underserved neighborhoods.

Mamdani and Lander co-endorsed one another to maximize the ranked-choice system’s potential, even appearing together on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert on the eve of the primary. Lander’s visibility grew after he was arrested by ICE officers while escorting immigrants from a routine court hearing.

The Working Families Party had backed a progressive slate topped by Mamdani and Lander. Adrienne Adams, their third endorsed candidate, addressed her supporters in Southeast Queens, saying: “We made people stand up and take note who this campaign was and why we were here and made people realize there really is somebody in this race that really does care about me.”

Elsewhere in the city, several borough-level contests saw decisive outcomes. In The Bronx, incumbent Borough President Vanessa Gibson fended off City Councilmember Rafael Salamanca. In Brooklyn, Borough President Antonio Reynoso retained his seat, defeating cannabis executive Khari Edwards. Manhattan’s borough presidency went to State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, who beat Councilmember Keith Powers.

Manhattan and Brooklyn also held district attorney races. Incumbents Alvin Bragg and Eric Gonzalez won re-election easily. These contests, tied to the state judicial system, were not subject to ranked-choice voting.

All 51 City Council seats were up for election, many facing heated primary contests. In Brooklyn, Councilmember Shahana Hanif beat challenger Maya Kornberg, while Alexa Aviles triumphed over Ling Ye. In Manhattan, Chris Marte maintained a lead over Elizabeth Lewinsohn and Jess Coleman. In The Bronx, Councilmember Pierina Sanchez dominated former Councilman Fernando Cabrera.

Although the full results and ranked-choice redistribution won’t be finalized until July, the early data suggests that Zohran Mamdani has not only won the Democratic nomination but has also reshaped New York City’s political conversation heading into November’s general election.

Yale and UConn Secure Spots in Latest Global University Rankings

Staff ReporterEducation, USA 0

Two of Connecticut’s premier institutions have earned spots on the list of the world’s top universities, according to the latest rankings from U.S. News and World Report. In the newly released 2025-2026 edition of the “Best Global Universities” rankings, which evaluated more than 2,250 universities from over 100 countries, Yale University emerged as a top 10 global contender, while the University of Connecticut also made its mark with a place in the overall list.

These rankings are formulated by analyzing several key performance indicators. The methodology considers global and regional academic reputations as well as research productivity, including metrics such as scholarly publications and citation rates. Each university receives a global score based on how well it performs across these indicators. This approach enables a standardized assessment of institutions across the globe.

Yale University earned an impressive position, ranking ninth among more than 2,000 global universities. Situated in New Haven, the Ivy League school achieved a global score of 86. This score is a reflection of its strong academic and research performance, as assessed by the various indicators used by U.S. News and World Report.

In addition to its overall ranking, Yale also performed exceptionally well in several academic subject areas. It was ranked No. 5 globally in psychiatry and psychology, No. 6 in immunology, No. 7 in arts and humanities, No. 8 in endocrinology and metabolism, and No. 9 in clinical medicine. These subject-specific accolades highlight the university’s specialized strengths and global influence in key fields of study.

Yale’s research credentials were further underlined by its high rankings in research reputation categories. The university was ranked No. 9 globally for research reputation and No. 7 for regional research reputation. These results demonstrate the institution’s standing not just in the United States, but also in the broader international academic community.

The university was also recognized for its scholarly output. Yale placed among the top 50 in two crucial research indicators: the total number of scholarly papers published in influential academic journals and the number of highly cited papers that rank among the top 1% most cited worldwide. These achievements emphasize the breadth and impact of Yale’s academic contributions.

Among the top 10 institutions globally, Yale is one of seven universities based in the United States. The other American institutions in the top tier include Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Stanford University, the University of California Berkeley, the University of Washington Seattle, and Columbia University. These universities share the global stage with prominent institutions from the United Kingdom, such as the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, and University College London.

The University of Connecticut also made it onto the global rankings list, coming in at No. 292. UConn shares this ranking with three other notable institutions: Durham University in the United Kingdom, Soochow University in China, and Université de Bordeaux in France.

UConn was awarded a global score of 59.1. While this score places it significantly below Yale in the overall rankings, it still underscores UConn’s role as a key contributor to global academia. The university also received recognition in specific academic disciplines. It was ranked No. 52 globally in ecology and No. 94 in space science, highlighting areas in which UConn is making notable contributions on the global academic stage.

In terms of research reputation, UConn’s strongest performance was in the category of regional research reputation, where it was ranked No. 85. This reflects the university’s growing recognition within its region for quality research and academic output.

The rankings methodology employed by U.S. News and World Report uses a detailed and data-driven approach. A total of 13 indicators are used to measure academic performance and research strength. These include global research reputation, regional research reputation, number of publications, books, and conference papers. Additional indicators measure normalized citation impact, total citations received, and the number of publications among the top 10% most cited.

The methodology also evaluates the percentage of a university’s publications that fall into the top 10% most cited category. International collaboration plays an important role as well, with separate indicators assessing collaboration relative to the institution’s country and overall international partnerships. Finally, rankings consider the number and percentage of highly cited papers that are among the top 1% globally.

According to the methodology, the rankings are based on a combination of these data points and metrics. Much of the data is derived from a global academic reputation survey conducted by Clarivate, an analytics firm specializing in academic and research insights. This ensures a comprehensive and transparent assessment of each university’s global standing.

The results highlight not only academic excellence but also the importance of international visibility and collaborative research. Both Yale and UConn’s presence in the rankings reflects the broader global influence of Connecticut’s higher education institutions.

The inclusion of both universities in the 2025-2026 “Best Global Universities” list reinforces Connecticut’s academic significance on the world stage. While Yale’s top 10 ranking showcases its continued excellence and leadership in global education and research, UConn’s placement in the top 300 reflects its upward trajectory and specialized strength in fields like ecology and space science.

These rankings serve as a valuable resource for prospective international students, academic professionals, and policymakers looking to understand the landscape of global higher education. They offer a clear picture of where institutions stand in relation to their peers and provide insights into the areas in which they excel.

By earning spots on the global stage, both Yale and UConn continue to affirm their roles as influential centers of learning and research. Their inclusion also highlights the diverse academic environment that exists within the state of Connecticut.

Yale’s achievements, including being in the top 10 for several key academic subjects and research indicators, underscore its long-standing tradition of excellence. Meanwhile, UConn’s solid performance in specific areas and its recognition for regional research reputation suggest a bright future and continued growth.

In summary, these rankings affirm the global competitiveness of Connecticut’s universities and reflect their contributions to the academic and research communities both locally and internationally.

US Issues Terror Alert Amid Rising Tensions Over Israel-Iran Conflict

Staff ReporterUSA, Security 0

Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has released a National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS) Bulletin warning of an elevated threat environment throughout the United States due to the nation’s direct involvement in the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. While there are currently no verified, specific, or credible threats aimed at the US homeland, officials are urging vigilance as tensions continue to rise in the Middle East.

Secretary Noem emphasized the government’s responsibility to ensure public safety during these volatile times. “It is our duty to keep the nation safe and informed, especially during times of conflict,” she stated. Highlighting the dangers associated with the unfolding Israel-Iran confrontation, she added, “The ongoing Israel-Iran conflict brings the possibility of increased threat to the homeland in the form of possible cyberattacks, acts of violence, and antisemitic hate crimes.”

The advisory went into effect on June 22, 2025, and is set to expire on September 22, 2025, at 11:59 PM ET. Authorities are encouraging citizens to promptly report any suspicious activities or potential threats to local police, FBI Field Offices, or the nearest Fusion Center. In emergencies, individuals should contact 911.

The Department of Homeland Security’s bulletin highlights several key concerns contributing to the elevated risk. One of the primary dangers involves the likelihood of cyber intrusions targeting American infrastructure. These attacks may come from pro-Iranian hacktivists or individuals and groups with direct affiliations to the Iranian government. Their typical targets are unsecured American networks and internet-connected devices.

The Department also raised concerns about Iran’s historical commitment to retaliate against American officials deemed responsible for the death of Qassem Soleimani, the high-ranking Iranian military commander killed in a US airstrike in January 2020. This long-standing objective has remained an active element of Iranian foreign policy and intelligence operations, suggesting potential threats to US leadership or government infrastructure.

In addition to cyber threats, there is a growing fear of physical acts of violence within the United States. The bulletin mentions that if Iran’s leaders issue a religious decree urging retaliation against US targets, it could significantly increase the probability that individuals loyal to the Iranian regime might resort to violence on American soil. Such a ruling might inspire lone actors to conduct attacks, even without direct orders or links to foreign terrorist organizations.

Past incidents also play a role in shaping this alert. The bulletin recalls that since 2020, US law enforcement has managed to prevent several potentially deadly plots backed by Iran. Additionally, attempts by the Iranian regime to eliminate critics of the government residing within the United States have been thwarted. These failed operations underscore the ongoing intent and capability of Iran to pursue its enemies, even within foreign borders.

Another concerning element cited in the bulletin is the pattern of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel sentiment motivating previous terrorist attacks within the United States. The ongoing strife between Israel and Iran could further inflame such hostility, potentially triggering more attacks carried out by individuals influenced by extremist ideologies. The Department warns that the current environment could serve as a catalyst for those looking to act on their hatred against the Jewish community, pro-Israel supporters, or American governmental and military symbols.

Foreign terrorist organizations have also responded vocally to the Israel-Iran conflict. Groups such as HAMAS, Lebanese Hizballah, the Houthis, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine have issued media statements since the beginning of the confrontation. Some of these statements have explicitly called for violence against US personnel and facilities located in the Middle East, presenting yet another layer of threat to American interests abroad.

Domestically, there is concern that such international calls for action could inspire violent extremists and hate crime offenders to target Jewish institutions, synagogues, community centers, pro-Israel events, or even federal buildings and personnel. The Department emphasized that any individual or group associated, or even perceived to be associated, with these entities might be at risk of becoming a target.

In addition to issuing warnings, the Department of Homeland Security has provided resources and guidance to help the public stay safe. Authorities encourage the public to remain attentive to instructions and updates from local officials and emergency personnel.

On the cybersecurity front, the Department’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) continues to offer guidance and tools for bolstering the defenses of US digital infrastructure. This includes practical steps for securing networks, identifying vulnerabilities, and preparing organizations for possible cyberattacks.

For those who witness any suspicious behavior or encounter potential threats—whether physical or digital—the DHS encourages reporting through the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative. This collaboration between DHS, the FBI, and local law enforcement aims to detect and prevent terrorism and other criminal activity before it escalates. The campaign reiterates its familiar slogan: “If You See Something, Say Something®.” Authorities urge the public to promptly report suspicious activity or threats of violence—including those made online—directly to local law enforcement, the FBI, or a Fusion Center.

As tensions in the Middle East continue to escalate, US officials remain alert to the possibility that these international hostilities could spill over into the homeland in the form of cyber disruptions, ideological violence, or targeted hate crimes. Although there are no immediate threats at this time, the government stresses the importance of public awareness and cooperation.

The current NTAS Bulletin is part of the Department’s broader efforts to prepare Americans for emerging threats while reassuring them that law enforcement and national security agencies are actively monitoring the situation. By staying informed and vigilant, officials hope to reduce the chances of any planned attacks succeeding.

The alert concludes by reminding citizens that while the threat level has risen due to international conflict, prompt action, public cooperation, and intelligence sharing can help prevent incidents and maintain safety across the country. The government is urging all individuals and communities to take part in safeguarding the homeland by remaining observant, proactive, and informed.

The NTAS Bulletin will remain in effect until September 22, 2025. Until then, local, state, and federal agencies will continue to evaluate and respond to developments both at home and abroad to ensure the continued safety of the American people.

Three H-1B Indian Workers Denied US Entry for Overstaying in India

Staff ReporterImmigration, USA 0

Three Indian professionals holding H-1B visas have been denied entry into the United States and had their visas revoked by US authorities after staying in India longer than permitted. All three were found to have exceeded the allowed duration of stay outside the US, with one individual away for nearly three months and the others for even longer. Despite presenting documentation that justified their prolonged absence and letters of support from their employers, they were still denied entry and asked to return to India.

One of the individuals involved shared details of the incident in a message that has since gained traction on social media.

The message, circulating widely with the title “H-1B visas cancelled in Abu Dhabi,” opens with a revealing account of the ordeal: “We had a particularly tough situation in US immigration in Abu Dhabi.” The sender explained that “authorities revoked H-1B visa and denied port entry for three candidates, including me, for staying in India for more than two months.”

This situation unfolded at the Abu Dhabi International Airport, which hosts a US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Preclearance facility. This preclearance service allows travelers to complete US immigration and customs inspections before even boarding their flight to the United States. It is one of the few locations outside of North America that provides this service, effectively turning it into a US border checkpoint.

Even though the affected individuals had documentation in hand to explain their stay in India, including proof of emergencies and employer-approved leave, their explanations were not enough to sway immigration officers. The worker stated, “Even after showing all the proof of emergency and approval emails from the company, the CBP still revoked their visas.”

He went on to explain that the visa was canceled under a specific provision: “Attorney denied entry and put a cancelled seal on visa with reason pursuant to 41.122(h)(3) seal and sent us back to India.” The message also provided an important caution for others on H-1B visas, emphasizing the importance of not staying out of the US for too long. “The maximum permissible stay outside the US is 60 days for H-1B holders with what he called a valid reason,” the message noted, adding that it’s much safer to limit foreign travel to between 30 and 40 days to avoid unnecessary complications with reentry.

To better understand the implications of such an action, it is helpful to look at the function and rules surrounding the H-1B visa. The H-1B is a non-immigrant visa issued by the United States to allow employers to bring in skilled foreign workers temporarily. These workers are generally employed in specialized fields such as information technology, engineering, medicine, and business. For a foreign worker to obtain this visa, their employer must sponsor them by filing a Labor Condition Application (LCA) with the US Department of Labor and then petitioning the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for approval.

The H-1B visa typically permits the worker to reside in the US for up to six years. However, employers can request extensions by filing Form I-129, a petition requesting the US government to continue the worker’s stay. Despite these options, being away from the US for extended periods without a proper reason or without continuous employment can be viewed by immigration authorities as a violation of visa terms.

Reactions to this incident were swift and emotional on social media, especially on the platform Threads, where a page named “nris_adda” highlighted the story with the caption, “Very sorry to hear this.” The post drew a range of responses from users, revealing divided opinions about who was at fault and what lessons others should draw from the incident.

One user expressed both sympathy and a practical takeaway: “Sadly, the worst experiences you will have are at the Canadian borders and the pre-Clearance facilities (Shannon, Abu Dhabi). Best to avoid those ports. Of course, the officers acted lawfully but failed to see the extenuating circumstances. Very sad.”

However, not all comments were empathetic. Another user took a more critical stance: “There is no need to be in India for 3 months if you are working in the USA.” This comment underlined the notion that extended stays outside the US might naturally raise red flags with immigration officers, regardless of personal circumstances.

A more judgmental comment pointed to a broader cultural observation: “Indians have a tendency to break rules and cry when there are repercussions. Visa is a privilege, not a right. If it clearly states you cannot stay for over 60 days, why do it and then fuss when denied entry?”

Another user echoed this sentiment, laying blame squarely on the visa holders themselves: “Ignorance is not an excuse. They have to blame only their carelessness.”

This case underscores a critical lesson for H-1B visa holders: awareness of and strict adherence to immigration guidelines is crucial. Even with the right paperwork and employer support, decisions at ports of entry rest with US immigration officers, who have broad discretion to revoke visas if they believe terms have been violated.

While the CBP acted within its legal boundaries, the lack of flexibility shown in a case involving emergency leave has sparked debate about the balance between enforcement and empathy. Still, as the experience of these three Indian workers demonstrates, the burden of proof lies heavily with the traveler, and even that may not always suffice.

The incident serves as a stark reminder of how vulnerable non-immigrant visa holders can be to sudden changes in their immigration status due to procedural misunderstandings or misinterpretations. For those relying on H-1B status to live and work in the US, maintaining continuous compliance with visa rules—even during trips abroad—is essential.

In conclusion, the revocation of H-1B visas for these three individuals reveals the strict scrutiny applied at US preclearance locations, especially when travelers are returning from extended stays outside the country. Their case highlights the need for both caution and awareness when navigating the complex landscape of US immigration, particularly under a non-immigrant visa.

Trump Administration Fires Majority of Voice of America Journalists, Ending an Era of U.S.-Funded Global News

Staff ReporterMedia, USA 0

In a sweeping move that effectively ends most operations of the U.S.-funded international broadcaster Voice of America (VOA), the administration of  President Donald Trump has fired hundreds of journalists, citing deep-rooted inefficiencies, waste, and political bias. The mass dismissals have wiped out nearly all remaining staff at the organization, marking the end of an 83-year-old institution that once stood as a beacon of American journalism abroad.

Established during World War II as a counter to Nazi propaganda, Voice of America has long functioned as a key tool of U.S. public diplomacy, offering independent news coverage in dozens of languages to countries with restricted or no press freedoms. But on Friday, the Trump-appointed leadership of VOA announced the termination of 639 employees, stating that the action was necessary to fulfill the administration’s promise to downsize the federal government.

“Today, we took decisive action to effectuate President Trump’s agenda to shrink the out-of-control federal bureaucracy,” said Kari Lake, who had been appointed by Trump to head VOA. Her announcement confirmed the mass firings, which followed months of internal uncertainty and political tensions.

Steve Herman, VOA’s chief national correspondent, described the sweeping staff cuts as “a historic act of self-sabotage.” For Herman and other veteran journalists within the organization, the decision dismantles an institution with a legacy of promoting press freedom and truth in places where such ideals are often under siege.

Among those terminated were members of the Persian-language service, a team that had recently been recalled to work after Israel launched strikes on Iran. However, their return to duty was short-lived. According to the Associated Press, several of the Persian reporters had stepped outside for a cigarette break on Friday when the termination notices were issued. Upon returning, they were denied re-entry to the building.

The scale of the dismissals has been staggering. Since March, over 1,400 employees — more than 85% of the agency’s staff — have lost their positions. Only 50 individuals are expected to remain on board across VOA, the Office of Cuba Broadcasting, and the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees and funds VOA and other similar outlets.

The decision to eliminate most of VOA’s workforce aligns with a March directive issued by Trump ordering the maximum possible elimination of VOA and USAGM within the boundaries of the law. The presidential order marked the culmination of a long campaign by Trump and his allies to rein in federally funded media outlets, which they accused of harboring left-leaning biases and straying from their original missions.

A group of three VOA journalists who have been involved in ongoing litigation to prevent the network’s closure issued a joint statement responding to the latest wave of firings. “It spells the death of 83 years of independent journalism that upholds US ideals of democracy and freedom around the world,” they wrote. The statement reflects deep concern that the dismantling of VOA undermines a historic American commitment to supporting free expression across the globe.

VOA, along with related outlets such as Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia, has earned a reputation for providing reliable and independent news coverage in regions notorious for media suppression. Its reporters have operated in hostile environments like China, Russia, Cambodia, and North Korea, often at great personal risk, to bring credible journalism to audiences otherwise subjected to state propaganda.

Despite the international praise VOA has garnered over the years, critics within the U.S. have accused the agency of political bias. Dan Robinson, a former VOA correspondent, wrote in an opinion piece last year that the organization had turned into a “hubris-filled rogue operation often reflecting a leftist bias aligned with partisan national media.” This perception appears to have fueled support within conservative political circles for scaling back or completely defunding VOA and similar outlets.

Trump’s antagonism toward VOA fits into his broader narrative of opposition to U.S. media institutions. Throughout his presidency, Trump repeatedly criticized major media organizations, labeling them as “fake news” and encouraging his supporters to distrust mainstream journalism. He also pushed for defunding other federally supported public media, including National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), arguing that they too displayed political bias and no longer served the public interest.

While Trump’s efforts to cut public media funding faced resistance in Congress, his appointees were able to implement substantial administrative changes within USAGM. By replacing leadership and pushing forward with aggressive layoffs, the administration sought to reshape or dismantle media entities it viewed as adversarial or inefficient.

The closure of VOA’s core operations, however, is not without consequences. It marks a significant shift in how the United States engages in international broadcasting and public diplomacy. For decades, Voice of America has represented an American commitment to the free flow of information and the power of factual journalism in confronting authoritarian regimes. The agency’s motto, “A free press matters,” now hangs in stark contrast to the dismantling of its newsroom.

Kari Lake defended the decision, stating that the layoffs were an overdue response to internal dysfunction and mismanagement. The administration, she emphasized, aimed to “restore credibility and focus” to U.S. global media operations. However, critics view the mass firings not as a course correction, but as an ideological purge that sacrifices an essential democratic institution.

As the dust settles, the future of VOA remains deeply uncertain. With only a fraction of its workforce remaining and its global operations gutted, many fear that its ability to fulfill its original mission has been permanently compromised.

In a media landscape increasingly divided along political lines, the demise of a respected international broadcaster like VOA sends troubling signals about the United States’ commitment to defending press freedom, both at home and abroad. For the journalists who once worked there, and for the global audiences who depended on its coverage, the closures represent not just a bureaucratic change, but the end of an era.

Steve Herman’s words continue to resonate: the dismantling of VOA is indeed “a historic act of self-sabotage” — one that may not be easily reversed.

America’s Soaring National Debt Crosses $37 Trillion, Threatens Economic Stability and Public Programs

Staff ReporterEconomy, USA 0

The United States has reached a new fiscal milestone that is causing deep concern among economists, lawmakers, and financial experts alike. The national debt has surpassed $37 trillion, raising the alarm as the federal government edges closer to a crisis where merely servicing this debt could consume nearly $1 trillion annually. This level of interest payments, if left unchecked, poses a serious threat to the federal budget and the government’s ability to maintain vital services.

As of June 20, the U.S. government’s debt exceeds the total annual output of the American economy. In other words, the country owes more than it produces in a year. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) warns that without significant policy changes, this debt load could skyrocket even further, reaching an astonishing 156% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by the year 2055.

The primary engine behind this growing debt is the persistently high annual budget deficit, which currently hovers around $2 trillion. This deficit is being driven by a combination of escalating government spending and a lack of sufficient growth in tax revenues. The imbalance is growing so severe that nearly one-quarter of all federal tax income is now being directed solely toward paying interest on the national debt.

This is not just a numbers game — the consequences for everyday Americans are very real. With so much money being spent on interest, less funding is available for key programs like Social Security, Medicare, national defense, and infrastructure. These are services and systems that millions of Americans depend on for their well-being, and the strain on their budgets is growing.

The danger isn’t limited to potential cutbacks in government programs. Economists caution that an unsustainable debt trajectory could also stifle private investment. As more government borrowing absorbs available capital in the financial markets, less is left for businesses and individuals seeking loans. This crowding-out effect can result in higher interest rates, reduced investment in innovation and expansion, and a slowdown in job creation.

The CBO paints a troubling picture if debt growth continues unchecked. It estimates that U.S. GDP could shrink by $340 billion over the next decade under the weight of this debt. Such a decline could lead to the loss of approximately 1.2 million jobs, in addition to hindering wage growth across all sectors of the economy.

Another complicating factor is the upward trend in interest rates. As the government borrows more, global investors are increasingly demanding higher yields in exchange for taking on the perceived risk of financing America’s deficits. These higher returns raise the overall cost of borrowing — not just for the federal government, but also for American businesses and households.

This domino effect can ripple through the economy, impacting everything from mortgage rates to corporate borrowing costs. As the cost of credit climbs, economic growth becomes harder to sustain. For a country already burdened by debt, such pressures could significantly deepen the fiscal hole.

There is also a mounting fear of a broader fiscal crisis. Should investors begin to doubt the U.S. government’s capacity to manage its obligations, the reaction could be swift and severe. A loss of confidence might trigger a sudden spike in interest rates, a collapse in the value of the dollar, or even a broader financial panic. Any of these outcomes would likely result in global economic turbulence, given the central role of the U.S. dollar and economy in international markets.

Despite these concerns, the U.S. economy is still showing some signs of growth. However, that growth is slowing. Economic forecasts suggest a modest GDP expansion of just 1.4% to 1.6% this year. At the same time, unemployment figures are beginning to inch upward, and inflation remains stubbornly above the Federal Reserve’s target range. These economic conditions make the path forward more precarious.

With tighter margins and less room for policy missteps, the government’s fiscal management is under increasing scrutiny. Experts across disciplines — from economists to business leaders — are issuing more urgent warnings. Past statements from public figures such as Elon Musk are beginning to appear prophetic. The Tesla CEO has been among those highlighting the unsustainable trajectory of America’s debt. As the evidence continues to mount, their cautions carry more weight.

“If the U.S. continues down this path, it won’t just be future generations paying the price,” the article warns, adding that “the reckoning could arrive much sooner.”

The choices ahead are not easy. Any meaningful effort to reverse the debt surge will likely require painful trade-offs, including higher taxes, cuts to popular programs, or a restructuring of the federal budget altogether. Yet, many lawmakers remain divided on how best to proceed, complicating the prospect of immediate action.

For now, America finds itself at a pivotal crossroads. The $37 trillion debt mark is more than a symbolic threshold — it represents a pressing challenge with real-world implications for economic growth, public services, and national security. Without decisive policy changes, the U.S. may be heading toward a future where rising debt becomes an anchor on prosperity rather than a tool for it.

In short, the mounting debt, growing interest obligations, and rising risks have created a sense of urgency that is hard to ignore. The longer the nation waits to address its fiscal imbalance, the narrower the window becomes to avert serious economic consequences.

Pentagon Unveils Details of Stealth Bombing Campaign on Iranian Nuclear Sites, Hailing “Operation Midnight Hammer” as Historic

Staff ReporterUSA, World 0

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. military’s overnight assault on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure has been described as the largest B-2 bomber mission ever conducted, delivering what defense officials say was crippling damage to key targets. In a rare public briefing on Sunday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine disclosed fresh insights into the covert operation, officially named Operation Midnight Hammer.

“This was one of the most classified and intricately coordinated missions we’ve ever executed,” Gen. Caine told reporters at the Pentagon, referring to the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. “Very few within Washington were even aware of the plan’s timing or operational scope.”

According to Caine, seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers departed from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri under the cover of night, with a parallel group dispatched westward over the Pacific to create a diversion. The 18-hour eastward journey required multiple aerial refueling sessions as the aircraft flew across the Atlantic, through the Mediterranean, and into the Middle East.

Accompanied by fighter escorts and support planes, the strike package carried out what Caine described as a “precisely timed and synchronized maneuver” involving midair rendezvous and deception strategies. “This level of coordination was unprecedented,” he emphasized, presenting a map that detailed the aircraft’s flight path and timeline.

Deception and Precision: The Strike Timeline

At approximately 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Saturday, as the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, a U.S. Navy submarine launched over 24 Tomahawk cruise missiles toward the Isfahan complex. Meanwhile, fighter jets secured the airspace ahead, ensuring a clear path for the bombers.

At around 6:40 p.m. ET — 2:10 a.m. Sunday in Iran — the lead B-2 released two GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs), known colloquially as “bunker busters,” onto the Fordow facility. Over the next half hour, a total of 14 MOPs were dropped on Fordow and Natanz. The Tomahawks impacted Isfahan shortly afterward.

Caine confirmed that the operation went undetected by Iranian defenses. “No missiles were fired at our aircraft, and Iranian fighters never took off. Our element of surprise held throughout,” he stated.

In total, more than 125 U.S. aircraft contributed to the operation, including bombers, fighter jets, tankers, and surveillance units. Over 75 precision-guided munitions were deployed, resulting in what the Pentagon calls “extensive destruction.”

“Initial damage assessments indicate all three sites have suffered significant structural and functional losses,” said Caine, while noting that comprehensive evaluations are ongoing.

U.S. Forces on High Alert for Potential Iranian Response

Caine warned that any retaliation from Iran or its allied militias would be met with swift consequences. “Our readiness posture is elevated, and any misstep by Iran would be an ill-advised and dangerous move. We will defend our interests,” he said.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who stood beside Caine during the press conference, echoed the sentiment, describing the mission as an “overwhelming and calculated triumph.” He emphasized that the operation specifically avoided targeting Iranian personnel or civilian infrastructure.

“This was a mission with a singular purpose: to dismantle the core of Iran’s nuclear ambitions,” Hegseth said. “The president’s directive was clear and decisive, and our forces executed it flawlessly.”

Hegseth highlighted the historical scope of the mission, calling it the longest-range B-2 deployment since 2001 and the first use of the GBU-57 MOP in combat. “Our bombers struck and returned undetected,” he said. “This was a global demonstration of American stealth, strategy, and strength.”

Trump Applauds Operation, Warns of Escalation

President Donald Trump formally announced the airstrikes on Saturday evening and followed up with a televised address, flanked by Hegseth, Vice President J.D. Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He praised the military’s efforts, stating the targets were “completely and totally obliterated.”

Trump reiterated his commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and warned of a broader campaign should Tehran refuse to engage in meaningful diplomacy.

“If Iran chooses not to make peace, we are prepared to dismantle remaining targets with speed and precision,” the president declared. “No military force on earth could have carried out what happened tonight. Not even close.”

As international observers assess the implications of the strike, questions loom over whether Iran will respond militarily or seek diplomatic offramps. Meanwhile, Washington stands firm, signaling that this mission was only the beginning if its demands remain unmet.

Trump Hails Strike on Iran Nuclear Sites, Warns of Future Military Action

Staff ReporterUSA, World 0

In a nationally televised address on Saturday evening, President Donald Trump described the recent U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities as a “remarkable military achievement” and cautioned that additional operations could follow unless Tehran agrees to a peace deal on Washington’s terms.

Speaking from the Cross Hall of the White House, Trump stated that the objective of the operation was to dismantle Iran’s ability to enrich uranium and eliminate what he called the “nuclear threat from the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.” Flanked by Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the president declared the mission an overwhelming success.

“Tonight, I can inform the world that Iran’s major nuclear sites have been effectively neutralized,” Trump said, referring to strikes on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities. According to Trump, those locations were “completely and totally obliterated” in coordinated U.S. attacks.

The announcement came just hours after Trump revealed the offensive via his Truth Social account. The airstrikes, carried out amid rising tensions in the region, mark a significant escalation in U.S. involvement in the conflict between Iran and Israel that has intensified over the past two weeks.

In a follow-up social media post, Trump issued a stern warning to Iran, stating that any form of retaliation would be met with overwhelming force. “This must end,” he wrote. “Either there is peace, or Iran will face consequences far more devastating than anything seen in recent days. Tonight’s strike targeted the hardest site. Others remain in our sights if peace talks fail.”

Trump offered no clear definition of what a “satisfactory” peace agreement with Iran would entail. He reiterated his longstanding position that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons or continue uranium enrichment under any circumstances.

Citing reports from Fox News and The New York Times, officials confirmed that six precision “bunker-buster” bombs were deployed against the Fordow site, which lies deep underground in a fortified mountain facility. Defense Secretary Hegseth and Pentagon officials are expected to provide further details on the strikes at a briefing scheduled for Sunday morning.

During his remarks, Trump noted he had spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu following the operation, emphasizing close coordination between the two allies. “We acted in unison,” he said. The White House also released images from the Situation Room showing top national security officials, including CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, monitoring the mission alongside the president.

The strike follows Trump’s earlier suggestion that the U.S. would give Iran two weeks to pursue diplomatic channels before initiating military action. Despite that statement, the abrupt nature of the operation has stirred debate in Washington over executive war powers.

While Republican leaders largely backed the president’s decision, some lawmakers questioned its legality, citing the lack of congressional authorization. “This is unconstitutional,” posted Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) on X. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) echoed the concern, saying, “Even if the decision proves strategically sound, its constitutional basis is highly questionable.”

The White House has not yet responded to inquiries regarding these constitutional concerns.

As global leaders and defense analysts continue to assess the ramifications of this strike, the world watches to see whether Iran will escalate the conflict or move toward a negotiated resolution.

GOP Tax Plan Could Deepen Struggles for Low-Income Families, Warns CBO

Staff ReporterUSA 0

Low-income families and children would be among the most affected groups under the Republicans’ proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). While the bill promises substantial benefits for affluent Americans, it would reduce support for some of the nation’s most vulnerable populations.

To fund the extension of the 2017 Trump-era tax cuts, Republicans in both chambers of Congress aim to scale back several essential safety net programs, including healthcare, food aid, and financial assistance. These changes would impact millions of American children.

Currently, more than 37 million children receive healthcare through Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). CHIP covers pregnant women and children slightly above the Medicaid poverty line. Combined, these programs provide coverage to nearly half of all children in the United States, ensuring vital prenatal care, facilitating over 40% of U.S. births and nearly half of rural births, and supporting millions of children through adolescence.

Under the Republican plan, states would be allowed to impose waiting periods before families can enroll in CHIP and penalize them for missing premium payments by locking them out of the program. Additionally, the bill proposes a nationwide Medicaid work requirement for the first time. Though the House version claims to exempt parents, Allison Orris of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) notes, “What we’ve seen from past experience with work requirements is that exemptions are not always effective.”

Senate Republicans take it a step further, requiring even part-time work from parents of children over 14. Kevin Corinth of the conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) argues that this may benefit families: “If [parents’] earnings go up because they’re complying, that actually could be good for the kids. Because there is good research showing that, when parents work and we get more earnings coming into the household, that can improve current and future outcomes [for children].”

However, critics believe these requirements create more red tape. “When there’s more red tape, we know that it’s harder for families,” explains Joan Alker, who leads the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University. “To see these kinds of cuts is very, very scary.”

Despite these criticisms, House Speaker Mike Johnson’s office defended the proposals, stating, “Republicans are protecting and strengthening Medicaid for American citizens who need and deserve it by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse.” On NBC’s Meet the Press, Johnson also declared, “There are no Medicaid cuts in the Big, Beautiful Bill. We’re not cutting Medicaid.”

However, the CBO estimates that the House bill would reduce federal Medicaid spending by approximately $800 billion over the next decade. The Commonwealth Fund suggests that one in five children could lose Medicaid coverage under this plan. Alker warns that the proposed changes would push states into making tough choices between reducing services or raising taxes. “Governors are gonna have to do the dirty work,” she says, adding that the Senate’s version would likely impose even greater burdens on states.

CBO research indicates that childhood Medicaid coverage correlates with increased adult earnings and higher tax contributions, potentially offsetting the cost of the program. “Increasing children’s enrollment in Medicaid would reduce the future federal deficit by between roughly $800 and $3,400 per child per year of enrollment,” the CBO found.

Beyond healthcare, Republicans are targeting food assistance. The House bill proposes substantial changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps, which currently helps over 15 million U.S. children afford groceries. Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst at CBPP, said the House proposal represents “the deepest cut to food assistance in history.”

The bill would expand existing work requirements under SNAP. “Research has repeatedly shown that this doesn’t increase people’s employment. It doesn’t increase their earnings. It just cuts people off of SNAP and leaves them hungry,” Bergh argues.

In total, the House plan would cut over $290 billion from SNAP over the next 10 years. Bergh estimates this would “eliminate or substantially reduce” food support for more than 2 million children. The plan would also require states to fund between 5% and 25% of SNAP costs, a shift Bergh and others worry could prompt some states to reduce benefits, limit eligibility, or exit the program entirely. CBO notes that as a result, children could also lose access to free school meals, which are automatically tied to SNAP enrollment.

Overall, CBO estimates the poorest households would lose about $1,600 annually under the GOP proposal—mainly due to reductions in programs like Medicaid and SNAP. In contrast, the wealthiest Americans would gain an average of $12,000 per year. Disputing the analysis, House Republicans insist that “the biggest beneficiaries of this [bill] will be low- and middle-income Americans,” according to Speaker Johnson.

The Senate’s plan closely aligns with the House’s in imposing work requirements and shifting costs to states.

On the tax side, Senate Republicans propose modest improvements to tax benefits for families, including the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit. Sarah Rittling, executive director of First Five Years Fund, welcomed this move, saying, “Expanding child care tax credits in the Senate bill is a step in the right direction toward making care more affordable and accessible for families nationwide.”

However, proposed changes to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC) have raised concerns among researchers. The EITC, a critical anti-poverty measure for low-income working families, would require parents to undergo a burdensome precertification process before claiming the credit. Kevin Corinth of AEI notes that this added requirement could create barriers for families and place further strain on the IRS, which has already suffered staffing reductions.

The current Child Tax Credit allows families to deduct up to $2,000 per child from their tax bill. The House bill would raise this to $2,500 but maintains income requirements that limit access for low-income households. Megan Curran, policy director at Columbia University’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy, points out that the proposal would make it even harder for families to qualify. The House plan would disqualify an estimated 4.5 million children by requiring both parents to have Social Security numbers. The Senate version, by contrast, would require only one parent to have a Social Security number, though it’s unclear how many children that would still exclude.

The bill would also preserve the existing rule that blocks the lowest-income families from receiving the full credit. “Under current policy, a two-adult, two-child family needs at least $36,000 [in income] in order to get the full [credit],” Curran explains. “That’s 1 in 4 kids nationwide who are left out of the full credit.” If the credit is raised, that same family would need $48,000 in income to qualify. “As a result, under the House Reconciliation Bill, 1 out of every 3 children would be left out of the full credit nationwide,” Curran adds.

While many countries provide child benefits to all families, Curran emphasizes that “we exclude the families with lower and moderate incomes. And those are children who arguably could really benefit from this type of investment the most.”

In 2021, Congress briefly expanded the CTC to cover the lowest-income families, cutting child poverty nearly in half during its six-month duration. Curran argues such investments pay for themselves. “Every dollar that you spend on the child tax credit in an expanded form that reaches all kids would return at least $10 a year,” she says. The return comes in the form of better health, improved academic outcomes, higher lifetime earnings, and increased tax contributions.

H-1B Techie’s Green Card Dreams Derailed by Suspected Fake Job Applicants

Staff ReporterImmigration, USA 0

An H-1B visa holder working in the United States was recently hit with an unexpected and troubling setback from his employer—one that had nothing to do with his performance or qualifications, but rather with a suspicious surge of job applications. This tech professional, who shared his story online, is currently in his second year of employment as an Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning Engineer at a financial technology firm. His journey toward permanent residency in the U.S. was progressing until it was suddenly halted under questionable circumstances.

The company had initially planned to sponsor his green card under the “Data Scientist II” role—the same designation under which he was hired back in 2022. Everything seemed to be on track until earlier this month when the company’s immigration team suddenly decided to pause the PERM labor market process. The reason? They had received over 400 applications for the job opening posted as part of the labor certification requirement. Surprisingly, not a single interview was conducted before this abrupt decision was made.

According to the employee, the company feared that the sheer volume of applications could potentially trigger an audit by the U.S. Department of Labor. Such audits are often lengthy and complex, and companies typically prefer to avoid them due to the bureaucratic complications they entail. The techie also acknowledged a flaw in the process, admitting that the job description provided for the PERM process was vague and didn’t accurately represent the kind of work he actually performs.

In the time since the original PERM application process began, the H-1B worker has even received a promotion. He now holds the position of AI/ML Engineer III. With this new role, his employer has opted to restart the green card process from scratch, which includes preparing a new job posting and going through the labor market testing phase again.

But what’s more alarming about this entire episode is what it reveals about an emerging and disturbing trend. The unusually high number of applications received for the Data Scientist II role may not be entirely genuine. In fact, another user on social media highlighted the presence of an account on the platform X (formerly Twitter) that has been actively urging individuals to flood PERM job postings with applications. The account even boasted about the outcome of the exact scenario that this tech worker experienced, sharing celebratory posts whenever companies were forced to pull back from the green card sponsorship process due to overwhelming applicant numbers.

There appears to be a coordinated effort among some individuals online to disrupt the green card processes of H-1B visa holders by artificially inflating the number of applicants for labor certification jobs. Some of these users are openly admitting that they are applying for positions under the PERM process for which they are not remotely qualified. Their objective is not to secure the job, but to sabotage the path to permanent residency for foreign workers.

“This is weaponizing a system that is already skewed against immigrants,” one observer noted. U.S. citizens who participate in these tactics face no legal repercussions. They are allowed to apply for any job, even if they do not meet the qualifications or do not intend to accept the position if offered. As a result, the real cost is borne by the H-1B visa holders, who are already navigating a complex and uncertain immigration landscape.

For many foreign workers, the PERM process is an essential step toward obtaining a green card, which in turn provides a sense of security and stability in the U.S. However, the system requires the sponsoring employer to demonstrate that there are no qualified U.S. workers willing and available to take the job. This is typically done by advertising the job and allowing a window of time for applicants to respond. If qualified U.S. workers do apply, or if the volume of responses is unusually high, the process may be paused or even abandoned entirely, as companies fear scrutiny or delays from federal audits.

In this particular case, the flood of over 400 job applications—none of which resulted in interviews—has raised serious questions about the legitimacy of those applications. The affected H-1B techie, who had followed all the legal and professional steps to advance his career and permanent residency in the U.S., finds himself back at square one.

The employer’s decision to pause the PERM process and start anew might appear as a procedural reset, but it represents a significant emotional and professional setback for the worker. Not only does it delay his green card timeline, but it also places his future in the U.S. in jeopardy, especially given the limited duration of H-1B visas and the uncertainty involved in annual renewals.

This growing trend of sabotaging PERM listings could have far-reaching implications for the broader immigrant community in the U.S. It exposes a vulnerability in the labor certification system—one that can be exploited without consequence to deliberately derail the aspirations of skilled foreign workers.

The techie’s story highlights how a system designed to balance opportunities for domestic workers and foreign talent can be manipulated to serve exclusionary agendas. While immigration processes have always been subject to regulatory checks, this new wave of deliberate disruption is unprecedented in its scale and intent.

As the techie’s experience circulates online, it has sparked broader conversations about the fairness and resilience of the current immigration system. Supporters of H-1B workers argue that reform is urgently needed—not only to streamline the green card process but also to safeguard it from bad-faith actors who misuse the system for political or personal motives.

In the meantime, individuals like the AI/ML engineer at the center of this story are left to pick up the pieces and start over. Despite his qualifications, promotion, and proven contributions to his employer, he now faces yet another uphill battle to secure his place in a country he has already begun to call home.

There is little legal recourse for H-1B workers in such scenarios. The immigration system allows domestic applicants to flood listings without accountability, while foreign workers face strict scrutiny at every stage. In essence, those looking to derail green card sponsorships can do so freely, but the consequences fall squarely on the shoulders of the immigrants affected.

As one observer succinctly put it, “There is no legal trouble for anyone who is applying for these jobs. But for an H-1B techie chasing a secure future in the US, he pays a heavy price.”

Trump Considers Joining Israeli Strikes on Iran as Tehran Seeks Talks

Staff ReporterDiplomacy, USA 0

President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that he is deliberating whether the United States should participate in Israeli military strikes on Iran. He also claimed that Iranian officials had approached the U.S. seeking negotiations to resolve the intensifying conflict.

Trump made these remarks while observing the installation of a new flagpole at the White House. Indicating growing impatience, he emphasized that his tolerance for Tehran’s actions had already worn thin and reiterated his demand for Iran’s complete and unconditional capitulation. “My patience had already run out,” he declared, adding once again his call for the Islamic republic’s “unconditional surrender.”

Addressing reporters from the South Lawn, Trump responded ambiguously when asked if he had made a final decision on launching American airstrikes. “I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do,” he said, maintaining his characteristically unpredictable stance.

The escalating situation follows Israeli military actions targeting Iran, including reports that one of Israel’s drones was downed over Iranian territory. Despite the rising tensions, Trump pointed to Iran’s growing difficulties as a sign that the country was feeling pressure. “I can tell you this, that Iran’s got a lot of trouble, and they want to negotiate,” Trump stated.

According to the president, Iranian officials had even proposed dispatching envoys to the White House to open discussions focused on Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, hoping such talks could put an end to Israel’s continuing air campaign. However, Trump appeared dismissive of the proposal’s timing. “I said it’s very late to be talking. We may meet. There’s a big difference between now and a week ago, right? Big difference,” he remarked.

Still, Trump acknowledged the gravity of Iran’s overture, describing the offer as a bold move on Tehran’s part. “They’ve suggested that they come to the White House. That’s, you know, courageous, but it’s, like, not easy for them to do,” he said. Despite calling it “very late,” Trump did not rule out the possibility of engagement. When asked directly whether it was too late for negotiations, he replied, “Nothing is too late.”

This moment marks a significant shift in Trump’s approach to Iran. During his presidency, he initially favored a diplomatic strategy aimed at curbing Tehran’s nuclear program, seeking a new deal to replace the 2015 agreement he had withdrawn from in 2018. However, with Israel’s recent air assaults now in their sixth day, Trump appears to be aligning more closely with America’s key Middle Eastern ally, signaling a willingness to consider military measures.

In parallel, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth addressed lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, confirming that the Pentagon is supplying President Trump with potential strategies regarding Iran. However, he stopped short of revealing whether the U.S. military intended to participate directly in Israeli-led strikes.

Hegseth’s comments came during a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, the final installment in a series of sometimes confrontational sessions with legislators. Throughout the hearings, he has faced questions on a range of topics, including his controversial use of encrypted messaging app Signal for sensitive military communications earlier this year and the Pentagon’s policies on transgender troops.

During his testimony, Hegseth emphasized that the Pentagon was taking extensive precautions to safeguard American forces stationed in West Asia. “Maximum force protection” is being implemented, he confirmed. However, he made it clear that the decision to escalate militarily rested solely with President Trump.

One potential course of action under discussion is the provision of a powerful “bunker buster” bomb to Israel. Such a weapon would enable Israeli forces to strike deeply buried Iranian nuclear sites. However, deploying this bomb would necessitate the involvement of a U.S. B-2 stealth bomber and its pilot, a step that would bring the United States directly into the conflict. Hegseth offered no details about whether such an action was imminent or likely.

Meanwhile, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei publicly rejected the notion of surrender. In a stern warning aimed at Washington, he vowed never to capitulate and cautioned that U.S. intervention could lead to severe consequences. Khamenei stated that Iran would “never surrender” and warned of “irreparable damage” should the United States choose to get involved in the confrontation.

Trump’s rhetoric and the White House’s increased openness to military involvement underscore the shifting dynamics in U.S. foreign policy toward Iran. The administration, once focused on re-negotiating nuclear terms, is now appearing more inclined toward the use of force. Yet even as he threatens military options, Trump continues to leave the door to diplomacy ajar, albeit narrowly.

By highlighting Iran’s proposed diplomatic outreach, Trump portrays the regime as desperate and vulnerable, yet at the same time, he emphasizes that any resolution would come on America’s terms. This dual strategy of pressure and ambiguity—while maintaining a veneer of openness to negotiation—reflects a characteristic Trumpian approach to foreign crises.

The possibility of U.S. engagement in Israeli military actions represents a dramatic escalation in regional tensions. It would also mark a decisive turn from previous American positions that often aimed to avoid direct conflict in the Middle East. Now, as Israel intensifies its campaign and Iran signals a potential willingness to talk, the world watches closely to see whether Trump’s next move will be diplomatic, military, or—as is often the case with him—something entirely unpredictable.

US Military Ramps Up Aerial Activity in Europe Amid Escalating Iran-Israel Tensions

Staff ReporterGlobal, USA 0

In the past three days, no fewer than 30 US military aircraft have been redeployed from bases across the United States to Europe, as confirmed by flight tracking data analyzed by BBC Verify. The specific aircraft involved are all military tanker planes, which are primarily used for in-air refueling of combat aircraft such as fighter jets and bombers.

These tankers, especially the KC-135 Stratotankers, have made stopovers at American airbases located in Spain, Scotland, and England. Flight monitoring service Flightradar24 documented that at least seven of these aircraft had transited through these European bases.

This notable increase in military aviation movement coincides with rising tensions between Iran and Israel. The conflict flared up following an Israeli operation conducted last Friday, which officials in Tel Aviv claimed was aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear development program.

Although there is no official confirmation linking these US aircraft movements directly to the Israel-Iran conflict, military experts believe the timing and nature of the deployments are significant. Justin Bronk, a senior analyst at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), remarked to BBC Verify that the air tanker activity is “highly unusual.” He further noted that the redeployments are “highly suggestive” of preparations by the United States to implement contingency plans that could potentially involve “intensive combat operations” in the region in the near future.

All seven tankers tracked have since moved onward, with most flying east of Sicily by Tuesday afternoon, based on available tracking data. While six of the aircraft had undisclosed destinations, one was confirmed to have landed on the Greek island of Crete.

Adding further perspective, Vice-Admiral Mark Mellett, former chief of the Irish Defence Forces, suggested the aircraft movements may form part of a wider US strategy centered around “strategic ambiguity.” According to him, this tactic could be designed to pressure Iran into making concessions during ongoing negotiations regarding its nuclear program.

The timeline of recent developments is also telling. Israel’s initial strike on Iranian nuclear sites occurred on Friday, only one day after a deadline set by US President Donald Trump for Iran to come to an agreement on suspending its nuclear initiatives had lapsed.

Parallel to the increased air traffic, there are reports indicating that the US has repositioned the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier. Previously stationed in the South China Sea, the Nimitz is now reportedly en route to the Middle East. Reuters reported that a scheduled engagement involving the carrier in Vietnam was canceled due to what the US embassy in Hanoi described as an “emergent operational requirement.”

Data from MarineTraffic, a platform that tracks maritime movements, showed that the USS Nimitz was last observed navigating the Malacca Strait toward Singapore early Tuesday. This warship not only transports a squadron of fighter jets but is also accompanied by multiple guided missile destroyers, forming a powerful naval task force.

Further reinforcing its presence in the region, the US has deployed multiple advanced fighter jets—including F-16s, F-22s, and F-35s—to various bases across the Middle East. According to three defense officials who spoke to Reuters, the tanker planes relocated to Europe are capable of refueling these jets during prolonged operations.

On Tuesday, US Vice-President JD Vance added fuel to the speculation of increased American involvement in the region. In a social media post, he suggested that the US may take direct military action to support Israel’s offensive against Iran’s nuclear capabilities. “Trump may decide he needs to take further action,” he stated, referring to potential efforts to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program.

Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is known to include two key underground enrichment facilities. One is at Natanz, a site already targeted by Israeli forces. The second is Fordo, located deep within a mountain near the city of Qom. Penetrating the hardened Fordo site would likely require the use of the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), according to two senior Western military officers who spoke to BBC Verify.

These “bunker buster” bombs weigh an enormous 30,000 pounds (13,600 kilograms) and are capable of piercing up to 200 feet (60 meters) of reinforced concrete. The only aircraft in the US military arsenal that can carry such a weapon is the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber.

Recently, the United States stationed a B-2 bomber squadron at its base on Diego Garcia, an island strategically located in the Indian Ocean. Though the island is situated approximately 2,400 miles from Iran’s southern coast, military analysts argue that this distance places Iran well within operational reach.

Air Marshall Greg Bagwell, a former deputy operations chief with the Royal Air Force, explained the strategic advantage of using Diego Garcia as a launch point. “You would be able to maintain a sustained operation from [Diego Garcia] far more efficiently,” he told BBC Verify. “You could literally have them round the clock operating.”

However, the most recent satellite images of Diego Garcia no longer show the presence of B-2 bombers on the island. This discrepancy has raised eyebrows among defense analysts. Vice-Admiral Mellett said, “I would expect to see the bombers on the island ahead of any operation targeting Iran,” adding that their absence represents “a missing piece of the jigsaw.”

Air Marshall Bagwell concurred with this observation but pointed out that B-2 bombers are capable of undertaking 24-hour missions and could theoretically launch a strike from the continental United States itself if the President were to authorize an attack.

“They’ve taken away any means for Iran to now defend itself,” Bagwell concluded. “Which obviously leaves any military or even the nuclear targets pretty much at the mercy of whatever Israel wants to do to it.”

As the situation continues to evolve, the flurry of military activity by the US—both aerial and naval—has added a new layer of complexity to the ongoing Iran-Israel tensions. Whether these moves signal preparations for a potential military campaign or serve as a calculated warning remains uncertain. Nonetheless, the rapid redeployment of tanker aircraft, stealth bombers, fighter jets, and naval assets suggests that Washington is readying itself for a broad range of contingencies.

Fall-Related Deaths Among Older Americans Surge, With White Seniors Most Affected

Staff ReporterHealth, USA 0

A recent report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reveals a troubling rise in unintentional fall-related deaths among older adults in the United States, with white seniors representing the vast majority of these fatalities. The study, released on Wednesday, indicates that between 2003 and 2023, the death rates from falls have significantly increased across all senior age groups.

According to the CDC’s findings, the mortality rate due to falls climbed by more than 70% for individuals aged 65 to 74 over the 20-year period. For those aged 75 to 84, the rate rose by more than 75%. The most dramatic rise was seen among adults 85 and older, where the rate more than doubled. This alarming trend underscores the growing risk older Americans face from what might seem like simple accidents.

“Falls continue to be a public health problem worth paying attention to,” commented Geoffrey Hoffman, a University of Michigan researcher not involved in the CDC study. He added, “It’s curious that these rates keep rising.” Hoffman, who has extensively studied elderly fall patterns, emphasized the importance of understanding the increasing death rates and their implications for public health.

The CDC did not delve into specific reasons for the rising rates, but many experts suggest a combination of contributing factors. One explanation could be that as medical examiners and doctors become more precise in determining causes of death, they are increasingly identifying falls as the root cause. Another contributing factor may be the aging population in the U.S., with more people living well into their 80s and beyond — ages where the repercussions of a fall are more likely to prove fatal.

In 2023 alone, more than 41,000 Americans of retirement age died due to unintentional falls. This figure represents the most recent year for which comprehensive data from death certificates are available. These deaths accounted for roughly 1 out of every 56 deaths among older Americans that year. The analysis underscores how common and deadly falls have become for the elderly.

The data further reveal that over half of the 41,000 fall-related deaths occurred among individuals aged 85 and older. Within this oldest age bracket, white Americans made up an overwhelming 87% of the fatalities. This racial disparity is particularly noteworthy and somewhat unexpected, given that health statistics often show minority groups facing greater health risks.

Hoffman pointed to this inversion of typical health disparities, saying, “Kind of a flip of the traditional disparity lens.” He explained that in most categories of illness and injury, people of color are usually overrepresented. However, in the case of fatal falls, white seniors are disproportionately affected.

The consequences of falling extend beyond the fall itself. They often lead to severe injuries such as head trauma or broken bones, which can result in permanent disability. In many cases, a fall may also set off a series of health complications that can accelerate decline and lead to death. Contributing factors to falls can include impaired vision or hearing, weakened balance, and side effects from medications that may cause dizziness or confusion.

Interestingly, the rate of fall-related deaths varied widely across different states in 2023. Wisconsin topped the list with the highest death rate from falls, followed by Minnesota, Maine, Oklahoma, and Vermont. In stark contrast, Alabama had the lowest rate, with Wisconsin’s numbers being more than five times higher.

Experts suggest that climate may partly explain these regional discrepancies. Cold weather and icy conditions in states like Wisconsin and Minnesota could increase the risk of falls among the elderly. But weather alone does not fully account for the differences. Other possible factors include varying levels of accuracy and consistency in how falls are reported and whether they are officially listed as the cause of death.

“We’ve yet to unravel why you see such differences in state rates,” said Hoffman, noting the complexity of factors behind the state-by-state variation. His comments reflect the ongoing challenge researchers face in understanding the full scope of what contributes to fatal falls and why certain populations are more at risk.

Another mystery that remains unresolved is why white seniors, particularly those aged 85 and older, are dying from falls at significantly higher rates than their counterparts in other racial and ethnic groups. In this oldest age group, white Americans experience death rates from falls that are two to three times higher than those of other racial demographics. Black seniors, notably, had the lowest death rate from falls in the same age group.

This pattern goes against the broader trend seen in most public health data, where racial minorities often bear a higher burden of disease and injury. The reasons behind this particular trend are still unclear, and more research is needed to explore social, environmental, and medical factors that may be at play.

Despite the uncertainties, there are measures that can help prevent falls and reduce risk. One of the most effective recommendations from experts is staying physically active. Regular exercise can improve balance, strength, and coordination — all critical for fall prevention. Physical activity also plays a key role in maintaining bone density and joint flexibility, which can help the body withstand and recover from a fall if one does occur.

The growing rate of fall-related deaths among seniors highlights a pressing public health concern. As Americans continue to live longer, addressing fall prevention becomes increasingly important. Better understanding the underlying causes — from physiological changes to social and environmental factors — is essential for developing targeted interventions and strategies that can help save lives.

In summary, the CDC’s report sheds light on a silent but deadly threat facing aging Americans: unintentional falls. With rates climbing sharply over two decades and disproportionately affecting white seniors, the findings call for greater attention and action. More research is needed to fully grasp the complex web of factors contributing to this trend, but experts agree on one thing — staying active and vigilant can make a significant difference.

-+=